


.0 ..- 



^ s*.,-^!--'"- 



40' 



<^'^ \ « a , "--^^ 



^ ^-^^^ 



^^ -i 



,4 ^. 






-^^0^ 



qO -^ ^T^^>' <^^ 



.Hq, 



0' a'*°y '' J>- 






V^'^. 



C^' . 



V 



V^ .0//^% 



o V 






^^-^^ 



^^<^^ 



^^ 



^^:' 



.>^^ 



-^o^ 

^^-n^ 





0^ 


.0 




^x. 


^0 



.0' 



,v r: 






.^ 



.^■ 



<^. 



0-^^ 






,0' 






■^^ 

'^v'. 






,^' 



c^ />..?-- 



-7' 






■\ 












.^' 






.0 ^ 









^0 






vU 



>' • ^ c'?^ ♦/ 



A^ 



'^ 



.f 



u 






nV' 



^ -.^m^.' ^^^ "^^^.^ "^^^^^/ . ^''' ""^ 






\\ 



^ 



*^ 



• ' * °' ^ 






v-0^ 

.•^°^. 






-X'^ » " ° -» ^. 






"■•^ 










o 
o 



4 CL^ * ^, 






0^ . ' ' ,, 



to 






.V 



"*>. 

•^ 



■a? -<• 

^ o. 



.0 






'-^^ 



.^ 



4 



<<> 



C,v^ 1%, 






.^' 






V 






0^ 






.-^^ .^,<^, 






O . '^ ' » « o 





















^ .0' 






0' 






^^■^<^. 















o V 



4 o^ 






/ 



Choctaw Citizenship Litigation 






r //I 



REPORT 



OF 



P. J. HURLEY 

National Attorney for the Choctaw Nation 



TO 



MAJOR VICTOR M. LOCKE, Jr. 

Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation 



MAY. 1916 



INDEX. 



Page Part 

Amos, Jack, et al.. Case 9 2 

" '♦ " " __ 40 11 

Acts Choctaw Council - -- 23 to 26 7 

(Mississippi Choctaw enrollment.) 

Acts of Congress -- 44 to 48 7 

(Providing for the appointment of Commission 
to adjust claims under 14th Article Treaty, 
1830.) 

Awarded "Net Proceeds" -.. 16 3 

Acts of Choctaw Council 41 and 49 7 

(In re settlement of rights of claimants to "Net 
Proceeds" funds.) 

Account - - 50 3 

(Net Proceeds statement.) 

Ashurst, Senator Henry F 50 13 

(Letter.) 448 12 

Agreement, July 1, 1902 15 7 

Atoka Agreement (Act of June 28, 1898) 9 7 

19 3 

Act May 31, 1900... 12 3 

Act of June 10, 1896 9 3 

Act of June 7, 1897... 9 t? 

Act of April 26, 1906...-. 16 7 

Appendix ; 27 11 

Bond, Reford. Statement .....3 to 67 8 

Bixby, Tams. Letter 448 12 

Barnette, Jackson, et al 338 12 

Ballinger, Hon. R. A 7 13 

Ballinger, Webster. Contracts 10 5 

Cases 306 12 

" 324 12 

" 344 12 

" 350 12 

" 55 12 

Bowie, Wm. L. Report 55 1o 125 11 

(^onnerly, Luke, W 5 5 

381 6 

Curtis Act 19 3 

Crews & Cantwell -• <> 5 

Claimants for Citizenship (i 13 



11 INDEX 

Page Part 

Carter, Hon. C. D 2 9 

" " '• 3 to 148 7 

" " " 3 to 67 8 

Campbell, Hon. P. P 148 7 

" " " 2 9 

Choctaws. Number of, in 1830 6 3 

Consideration for Choctaw Estate West 3 3 

Description of Choctaw Land West 3 3 

Eubanks, Thomas F., et als 40(5 12 

Ferris, Hon. Scott. Statement 3 11 

Fourteenth Article Treaty of 1830 5 3 

Gift, Jim. Decision 33 7 

Goings, James, et al 319 12 

Hill, Hon. Robt. P 2 9 

Hurley, P. J. Report 1 

" " Memorial _ 27 2 

" " " Letter to Hon. Franklin K. Lane... 1 4 

" " " Address Lake Mohonk Conference... 400 (3 

" " " Statement Mississippi Cases 1 to 148 7 

" " Ballinger eases 305 to 446 12 

" " " Lester Case 316 12 

" " Goings Case 324 12 

" " Barnett Case 344 12 

" " " Ross Case 351 12 

" " Mills Case 366 12 

" " " Harrison Case 384 12 

" " Marcy Case 402 12 

" " Eubanks Case 411 12 

" " Tolber Case 427 12 

" " " Smyers Case — 425 12 

History Citizenship litigation 1 to 22 13 

Jim Gift Case 33 7 

Jack Amos Case 10 7 

Jones, Hon. A. A. Letter 8 13 

Johnston, Hon. D. H., Memorial 27 3 

Lone Wolf (^ase 6 8 

Lane, Hon. Franklin K. Report 10 

Locke, Hon. Victor M., Jr., Memorial 27 3 

Lee, Albert J 10 5 

Mansfield, McMurray & Cornish 36 7 

(Percentage fee.) 

McKennon Roll 20 3 

McLaughlin, James. Report 5 

Mowling, C. B. Letter 8 5 

Net Proceeds case 14 3 

Net Proceeds Statement of Account 50 7 

Money in lieu of scrip and land 40 7 



INDEX . Ill 

Page Part 

Owen, Senator Robt. L. Statement 13 

Patentees (14th Article) 63 7 

Patent Choctaw Land West 98 7 

10 3 

Per Capita payment (1916) 27 14 

Resohition Mississippi Choctaw Council 397 6 

Report of March 10, 1898 11 7 

Report of James McLaughlin 5 

Report of Wm. L. Bowie 55 11 

Report Hon. Franklin K. Lane 10 

Report Subcommittee January 10, 1913 5 2 

Report Subcommittee January 2, 1915 9 

Rodgers, George D. Memorial 27 3 

Script Money (14th Article) 53 7 

Script " " 54 7 

Scripees " " 67 7 

Treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek (1830) 3 7 



Part One 



PART 1. 

Major Victor M. Locke, Jr., 

Principal Chief of the Choclaw Natio7i, 
Antlers, Okla. 

My Dear Mr. Sells: This report is submitted to 
you in conformity with the terms of my contract of 
employment as attorney for the Choctaw Nation. The 
report is intended to cover specifically the services per- 
formed by me during the last quarter, and to cover, 
generally, all the services performed by me in citizenship 
cases during the entire term of my employment as 
attorney for the Choctaw Nation. 

In order to properly defend the interests of the Choc- 
taw Nation against those claiming right to enrollment, 
as citizens of the nation, it was necessary for me to make 
an extensive investigation and study of the records 
pertaining to the tribal estate and also to study the 
records in all citizenship cases wherein the applicants 
had been denied right to enrollment. The records 
pertaining to the tribal estate which have been investi- 
gated, cover all transactions in regard to that estate 
from the date of the Treaty of October 18, 1820, up to, 
and including, transactions affecting said estate within 
the present year. 

We will not consider in this report any of the trans- 
actions affecting the tribal estate which have been 
investigated and briefed by me, except those matters 
involving that estate through the applications of persons 
claiming right to enrollment as citizens of the tribe. 

The making of the rolls of citizens of the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations was commenced by the United 
States Government under the Act of Congress of June 10, 
1S9H, and was continued until -the 4th day of March, 
1907. During this period of eleven years every person 
who claimed right to enrollment was invited to make 

0062—1 



application and these applications were given thorough 
and impartial consideration by United States officials. 

While the rolls were being made an agreement was 
entered into betw^een the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations and the United States which was approved by 
Act of Congress on July 1, 1902, and ratified bj^ a vote 
of the Choctaw and Chickasaw people on the 25th day 
of September of the same year. 

The agreement referred to contains the following 
provision: 

"No person whose name does not appear upon 
the rolls prepared as herein provided shall be 
entitled in any manner to participate in the dis- 
tribution of the common property of the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Tribes, and those whose names 
appear therein shall participate in the manner' 
set forth in this agreement" (32 Stat. L., 641). 

The Act of April 26, 1906, declared: 

"That the rolls of the tribes (Choctaw and 
Chickasaw) affected by this act shall be fully 
completed on or before the fourth day of March, 
1907, and the Secretary of the Interior shall have 
no jurisdiction to approve the enrollment of any 
person after that date" (34 Stat. L., 137). 

The rolls of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations were, 
under the laws quoted, and other laws pertaining to 
enrollment matters, completed and approved by the 
Secretary of the Interior on March 4, 1907. Only those 
whose names appear upon the finally approved rolls 
have right to participate in the tribal property. Each 
citizen (freedmen excepted) whose name appears upon 
the finally approved rolls, was entitled to, and did 
receive, an allotment equal to 320 acres of the average 
land. Each freedman received an allotment of 40 acres 
of land. After each citizen had received an allotment 
there was a residue of tribal property' remaining. This 



property consisted of unallotted land, timber reserve, 
segregated coal and asphalt deposits and segregated 
coal and asphalt surface land, and was estimated to be 
worth not less than $35,000,000. 

During the time in which the rolls were being made a 
great many persons who had no right to enrollment made 
application for enrollment and were denied the right to 
participate in the distribution of Choctaw and Chickasaw 
property. After the rolls had been closed, those who had 
been denied citizenship, together with a great many 
others who had never made application for enrollment, 
sought to have the rolls re-opened in order that they 
might again seek the right to participate in the dis- 
tribution of the residue of tribal property which remained 
vested in the tribes after each citizen had received an 
allotment. 

To procure the reconsideration of cases of applicants 
who had been denied enrollment, and to permit the 
filing of applications of other persons claiming right to 
enrollment, a great number of bills were introduced in 
both the House and the Senate. It was the investi- 
gation of the cases referred to in these bills that made 
necessary the preparation of the documents and the 
records which we are herewith transmitting. 

The principal matters pending before Congress which 
commanded our attention during this period were: 

First. House Bill No. 19213, presented by 
Representative Harrison of Mississippi, providing 
for the re-opening of the rolls of the Choctaw- 
Chickasaw Nations for the enrollment of the 
Mississippi Choctaws and House Bills, Nos. 
3389, 3390, 6537, 792(5, 7974, 8007, 10066, 10141 
and 12586 — all of which bills pertained in some 
manner to enrollment matters of the Choctaw and 
(vhickasaw Nations. 

Second. A great number of amendments offered 
by different members of the House and the 



Senate to the different Indian Appropriation 
Bills which were pending during the years 1912 
to 1916, inclusive. 

These amendments provided for the re-opening 
of the rolls and for the reconsideration of appli- 
cations of Mississippi Choctaws, and others, for 
enrollment as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. 

Third. Issue was joined with those who sought 
the re-opening of the rolls when the representa- 
tives of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
presented an amendment to the Indian Appro- 
priation Bill providing for a distribution among 
the enrolled members of the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Nations, of the funds arising from the sale 
of the residue of tribal property. This demand 
was made under the provisions of the Agreement 
of July 1, 1902 (supra). 

The documents which are to follow hereafter will 
show conclusively that no one had legal or equitable 
right to participate in the distribution of the tribal 
estate whose name does not appear upon the rolls as 
prepared, completed, and approved by the United 
States Government. These records will also show that 
the Choctaws and Chickasaws, whose names appear 
upon the approved rolls, are entitled, under the Agree- 
ment of 1902, to have the Government of the United 
States immediately sell the residue of their tribal prop- 
erty and distribute the funds arising from the sale per 
capita among the enrolled members. 

The great residue of tribal property remaining undis- 
posed of seemed to be a tantalizing object to many men 
who set about to devise means whereby they could, 
through some subterfuge, participate in the distribution 
of that estate. 

A corporation known as the Texas Oklahoma Com- 
pan}^ was organized and the contracts made between 
claimants for citizenship and certain firms of attorneys, 
through their agents and runners, were transferred to 



this corporation. The corporation sold stock and used 
the money derived from the sale of its stock to maintain 
representation in Washington to force open the rolls of 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations and to prevent a 
distribution of the residue of tribal property among the 
enrolled members of the tribes as provided for in the 
Agreement of 1902 (supra). 

The transactions of this corporation, the agents and 
attorneys associated with it and the nature of the con- 
tracts held by them, will be more fully considered 
hereinafter. 

The questions involved in this controversy before 
Congress were of serious importance to the members of 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes. The entire residue 
of the tribal estate was involved. 

It was to combat the efforts of the syndicate and the 
attorneys and runners and agents referred to, and to 
procure a fulfillment by the United States Government 
of the terms of its Agreement of July 1st, 1902, with the 
Choctaws and Chickasaws, that made necessary the 
investigation which was made by us. 

An historical outline of the controversy between the 
representatives of the tribes and the representatives of 
the citizenship syndicate and claimants, is fully set forth 
in the documentary evidence which is attached hereto 
in its regular order. 

Mississippi Choctaw Claims. 

At the time I was appointed attorney for the Choctaw 
Nation, there was pending before Congress the Harrison 
Bill above referred to. Shortly after my appointment 
the Committee on Indian Affairs of the House took the 
bill under consideration. I was appointed to succeed 
Mr. Ormsby McHarg. At the time that Mr. McHarg 
was serving as general attorney for the Choctaw Nation, 
Messrs. McCurtain & Hill, attorneys at law, of Mc- 

0002—2 



6 

Alester, Oklahoma, were also serving as attorneys for 
the nation. Mr. D. C. McCurtain of the firm had been 
engaged in citizenship cases during the time that the 
rolls were being made and had special knowledge of the 
issues involved in citizenship litigation. 

On account of Mr. McCurtain's familiarity with the 
questions involved, the Principal Chief of the Choctaw 
Nation directed that the argument on behalf of the 
nation should be presented by Mr. McCurtain. The 
argument on behalf of the Chickasaw Nation was 
presented by Mr. George D. Rodgers, then attorney for 
that nation. I was present at the hearing but did not 
participate in the argument except to concur in the 
arguments of Mr. McCurtain and Mr. Rodgers. The 
subcommittee which had the bill under consideration 
conducted extensive hearings and then took the matter 
under consideration for quite a long period. 

PART 2. 

On January 10, 1913, the subcommittee made a 
report to the Committee on Indian Affairs. This report 
was unfavorable to the Oklahoma Choctaws and Chicka- 
saws and favorable to the contentions of the claimants 
for citizenship. The report was accompanied by state- 
ments made by Hon. J. J. Russell, chairman of the 
subcommittee, and Hon. C. B. Miller, a member of the 
committee. 

The report, together with the statements accompany- 
ing the same, is hereinafter set out and marked Part 2. 

PART 3. 

After a full review of the history of the estate of the 
Choctaw Nation, and a thorough consideration of all 
the treaties and litigation affecting the rights of the 
Mississippi Choctaws, I became convinced that the 
report of the subcommittee was erroneous and that the 



same would not be adopted by the entire Committee 
on Indian Affairs if the members of the committee could 
be made to understand the nature of the questions 
involved. 

Some of the applicants who still resided in Mississippi 
were undoubtedly Choctaw Indians. Almost all of the 
applicants were, of course, imposters. I was convinced 
that even the Mississippi Choctaws who had remained 
in Mississippi had no legal, equitable, or moral right to 
enrollment in the Choctaw Nation. For the purpose 
of enlightening the members of the Committee on Indian 
Affairs of the House, as well as the entire membership 
of the House and Senate, Mr. George D. Rodgers, then 
attorney for the Chickasaw Nation, and myself, as 
attorney for the Choctaw Nation, together prepared a 
memorial which was printed by the Committee on 
Indian Affairs of the House and a copy of which was 
given to each member of the House and Senate. 

This memorial seemed to have much effect on the 
members who read it. It at least raised a question in 
their minds as to the correctness of the conclusions 
set forth in the report made by the subcommittee. In 
fact, it was not long until it became evident that the 
Committee on Indian Affairs of the House was inclined 
to hear the matter further before taking action on the 
report of the subcommittee. 

The memorial referred to is hereinafter set out in 
full and marked Part 3. 

PART 4. 

On behalf of the (Tioctaw Nation I re(|uested a 
rehearing of the case before the committee. A rehearing 
was granted but a subcommittee for the purpose of 
conducting the hearing was not appointed until the next 
session of Congress. 

In the meantime, in the course of my investigation I 



8 " 

discovered that the coi'i)orati()n known as the Texas 
Oklahoma Company, above referred to, had been organ- 
ized for the purpose of holding contracts made with 
attorneys by claimants for enrollment. I had sufficient 
information to convince me that the stock of the Texas 
Oklahoma Compan}^ was being sold upon representations 
that the company would derive vast sums of money in 
case the rolls of the > Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
could be forced open and. the Mississippi Choctaw 
claimants, and other claimants, allowed the right to 
participate in the distribution of the estate of the 
Oklahoma Choctaws and Chickasaws. The money pro- 
cured from the sale of the stock in this company was 
being used to maintain a lobby in Washington to prevail 
upon Congress to reopen the rolls. I knew that the 
contracts held by the Texas Oklahoma Company were 
not valid. They were not executed by persons who had 
any right to enrollment in the Choctaw or Chickasaw 
Nations. I knew that the Texas Oklahoma Company was 
spending the money received from the sale of its stock 
to maintain representation in Washington. I knew that 
the representatives of the Texas Oklahoma Company, 
and the claimants for enrollment, had been successful in 
their efforts to prevent a distribution among the Okla- 
homa Choctaw^s and Chickasaws of the funds arising from 
the sale of the residue of their estate. While I was in 
possession of this information I did not have it in such 
form as to enable me to substantiate a charge of the 
nature stated. For the purpose of securing the necessary 
information to combat the efforts of the Texas Oklahoma 
Company, and its associates, I wrote a letter to the Hon. 
Franklin K. Lane, Secretary of the Interior, asking him 
to detail an inspector for the purpose of procuring 
additional information on the subject. 

The letter which I addressed to the Hon. Franklin 
K. Lane is dated, June 12, 1913, and is hereinafter set 
out in full antl marked Part 4. 



PART 5. 

The Secretary of the Interior first assigned the inves- 
tigation of Mississippi Choctaw contracts to Mr. E. B. 
Linnen. Mr. Linnen was withdrawn from the work, to 
complete another important .assignment which he had 
theretofore commenced. After Mr. Linnen had been 
taken from the work the assignment was given to Mr. 
E. P. Holcombe. The untimely death of Mr. Holcombe 
occurred before he had completed the investigation. 
After the death of Mr. Holcombe, Maj. James Mc- 
Laughlin, an inspector in the office of the Secretary of 
the Interior, was detailed to make the investigation. 

Maj. McLaughlin's report is one of the most thorough 
and complete reports of its nature that I have ever 
read. The McLaughlin report is hereinafter set out in 
full and marked Part 5. 

PART 6. 

Before the McLaughlin report had been filed, I was 
invited to deliver an address at the Lake Mohonk Con- 
ference of Friends of Indians and Other Dependent 
Peoples. In this address I suggested the existence of a 
syndicate which was holding citizenship contracts and 
furnishing money to maintain representation in Wash- 
ington to reopen the rolls of the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations. The papers carried an account of this state- 
ment. The statement was immediately taken up b}^ the 
attorneys for the Mississippi Choctaws, their runners 
and agents, and all those associated with the Texas 
Oklahoma Company, in an attempt to discredit my 
statement. A resolution, which was probably prepared 
in the office of Messrs. Crews & Cantwell, attorneys at 
law of St. Louis, Missouri, was sent to Mississippi and 
signed by the alleged members of the Council of Missis- 
sippi Choctaws. (Under the law no such organization 
could exist in Mississippi.) 

6062—3 



10 

This resolution was printed and scattered broadcast. 
It used the names of prominent members of the House 
of Representatives and the Senate — asserted that my 
statements were false and that they were a slander not 
only upon the attorneys involved but on all members of 
the House and Senate who were honestly in favor of 
considering certain citizenship cases. Later, however, Mr. 
Luke W. Connerly, an agent of Messrs. Crews & Cantwell 
of St. Louis, assumed the responsibility of having pre- 
pared the resolution. He appeared before the committee 
and admitted that the statement I made before the 
Lake Mohonk Conference was true and that the state- 
ments contained in the resolution circulated by him 
and his associates were untrue. 

As shown by the McLaughlin report, Messrs. Crews 
& Cantwell had, prior to the appearance of Mr. Connerly 
before the committee, admitted the existence of the 
syndicate and the existence of the conditions as charged 
by me. This admission was made after my address at 
the Lake Mohonk Conference and before Connerly' s 
testimony was taken. Lately A. P. Powell, a former 
agent of Messrs. Crews & Cantwell, was convicted at 
Shrevesport, La., on a charge of using the United States 
mail to assist in perpetrating a fraud in connection with 
these matters. 

A copy of the Mississippi Choctaw . Resolution, and a 
copy of my address at Lake Mohonk, New York, are 
hereinafter set out and marked Pari 6. 

PART 7. 
Many of the briefs filed by attorneys for the claimants, 
during the hearings before the Committee on Indian 
Affairs of the House, contain statements which, if true, 
would undoubtedly entitle their clients to a right to 
participate in the tribal property of the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations. Many members of both the House 



11 

and the Senate were misled by the erroneous statements 
made by the attorneys for the claimants. When we 
were permitted to meet these attorneys before a special 
committee, which was. appointed to hear the case, we 
were able to show all the fallacies of the briefs and 
arguments that were made by the attorneys for the 
claimants. 

The committee, before which the case was finally 
heard, was composed of Hon. Charles D. Carter, of 
Oklahoma, chairman; Hon. J. D. Post, Ohio; Hon. R. 
P. Hill, Illinois; Hon. P. P. Campbell, Kansas, and 
Hon. C. B. Miller, of Minnesota. 

The bills pertaining to citizenship matters in the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, which were considered 
during tht hearings before the above named committee 
were numbered as follows: . Nos. 3389, 3390, 6537, 
7926, 7974, 8007, 10066, 10140, 12586. 

The testimony and arguments on the bills above 
referred to are contained in a document which was 
printed upon the request of the Committee oh Indian 
Affairs of the House of Representatives during the third 
session of the Sixty-third Congress, 1915. This record 
is too voluminous to be set out in full here but may be 
obtained by application to the House Document Room. 

My argument in opposition to the claims of the 
Mississippi Choctaws, which appears in the volume last 
above referred to and which was afterwards reprinted 
from said document for the use of the Committee on 
Indian Affairs of the Senate, is hereinafter set out and 
marked Part 7. 

PART 8. 

The title of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations to 
the residue of tribal property is such that each member 
of both tribes is entitled to an equal share of all the 
property of the two tribes. In order that the reader 



12 

may understand thoroughly the nature of the title of 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations to the tribal estate, 
I call attention to the fact that on October 18, 1820 
(7 Stat. L., 210), the United States Government entered 
into a treaty with the Choctaw Nation, then in Missis- 
sippi, whereby the nation ceded to the United States 
4,000,000 acres of its land in Mississippi, and in con- 
sideration of the cession on the part of the Choctaw 
Nation of 4,000,000 acres, and in part satisfaction for 
the same; the United States Government ceded to said 
nation a tract of country west of the Mississippi River — 
situate between the Arkansas and Red Rivers, and 
bounded as follows: Beginning on the Arkansas River, 
where the lower boundary line of the Cherokee strikes 
the same; thence up the Arkansas to the Canadian Fork 
and up the same to its source; thence due south to the 
Red River; thence down Red River three miles below the 
mouth of Little River, which empties itself into Red 
River on the north side; thence a direct line to the 
beginning. 

It is not necessary to go into detail here to show that 
all the land embraced in this grant was not at that time 
within the territorial limits of the United States. The 
title to this land was more definitely defined in the 
Treaty of September 27, 1830 (7 Stat. L., 335), commonly 
known as the Treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek. 

Under the terms of the Treaty of Dancing Rabbit 
Creek a patent was issued to the Choctaws. The 
patent is dated March 23, 1842, and contains the 
following language: 

In fee simple to them and their descendants, 
to inure to them, while they shall exist as a 
nation and live on it, liable to no transfer or 
alienation except to the United States and with 
their consent.- 

By the Treaty of January 27, 1837 (11 Stat., 573), the 
Chickasaws purchased an interest in th(^ Choctaw 



13 

estate west of the Mississippi River "to be held on the 
same terms that the Choctaws now hold it . . . 
(which is held in common with the Choctaws and 
Chickasaws)." 

By the Treat\^ of 1855 the United States guarantees 
the title to all the lands within the confines of the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations to the tribes in the 
following language : 

To the members of the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Tribes, their heirs and successors, to be held in 
common, so that each and every member of 
either tribe shall have an equal undivided interest 
in the whole. 

Section 29 of the Atoka Agreement between the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations and the United States, 
approved by Act of Congress, July 28, 1898 (30 Stat. 
L., 495), provides that the land belonging to the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations shall be allotted to the members 
of said tribes so as to give to each and every member of 
these tribes, as far as possible, an equal share thereof. 
The Supplemental Agreement which w^as approved by 
Act of Congress, July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. L., 641), provided 
that the coal and asphalt deposits, so reserved from 
allotment, should be sold at public auction for cash, 
under the direction of the President and by a commission 
created under the provisions of the treaty and provided 
further: 

That the proceeds arising from the sale of the 
coal and asphalt land, and coal and asphalt 
deposits, shall be deposited in the Treasury of 
the United States to the credit of said tribes to 
be paid out per capita to the members of said 
tribes (freedmen excepted) with other moneys 
belonging to said tribes in the manner provided 
by law. 

By reason of the nature of this tith^, the enrollment 
of anyone as a citizen of the Choctaw Nation would 



u 

dimmish the interest of the individual members of the 
Chickasaw Nation in the same proportion as the interest 
of the individual members of the Choctaw Nation. The 
same would be true as to the individual members of the 
Choctaw Nation in case of the enrollment of members of 
the Chickasaw Nation. For this reason the Chickasaws 
are as deeply interested in the defense of the Choctaw 
Nation against claimants for enrollment as the Choctaws.. 

A very able and comprehensive argument in defense of 
the Chickasaw Nation and against the Mississippi 
Choctaw claimants, was presented by Mr. Reford Bond, 
attorney for the Chickasaw Nation. Mr. Bond had 
been appointed to succeed Mr. George D. Rodgers, who 
was representing the Chickasaw Nation, when I was 
appointed attorney for the Choctaw Nation. 

A copy of Mr. Bond's argument is hereinafter set out 
in full and marked Part 8. 

PART 9. 

After the close of the arguments on the Mississippi 
Choctaw claims, the subcommittee above named took 
the matter under advisement and on January 2, 1915, 
they reported to the Committee on Indian Affairs of 
the House of Representatives. The report of the sub- 
committee was in favor of the Oklahoma Choctaws and 
Chickasaws and against the Mississippi Choctaws. The 
report of the subcommittee was adopted by the com- 
mittee. This report reversed the report of the subcom- 
mittee which had reported favorably on the claims of 
the Mississippi Choctaws on January 10, 1913. 

A copy of the report is attached hereto and marked 
Part 9. 

PART 10. 

In considering these matters to the present point, we 
have, of course, eliminated all arguments, briefs, and 
correspondence, not essential to a general history of the 



15 

Titigation. We have not submitted the various reports 
of the different kSecretaries of the Interior, all of which 
were favorable to the Oklahoma Choetaws and against 
the Mississippi Choetaws. In order, however, that the 
attitude of the Interior Department on the subject may 
be clearly defined in this report, I am attaching hereto 
the report of Hon. Franklin K. Lane, Secretary of the 
Interior. After having considered the claims of the 
Mississippi Choetaws at great length, the Secretary 
reported adversely upon the claims. The report is a 
strong argument against the Mississippi Choetaws and 
in favor of the Oklahoma Choetaws and Chickasaws. 
A copy of the report of the Secretary of the Interior, 
dated January 8, 1915, is hereto attached and marked 
Part 10. 

PART 11, 

While the Indian Appropriation Bill, carrying appro- 
priations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1916, was 
pending before the Committee on Indian Affairs of the 
United States Senate, arguments were presented by Mr. 
Walter S. Field, and Mr. Webster Ballinger, both 
attorneys at law of Washington, D. C, in favor of 
an amendment which was offered by Senator Robert 
M. La FoUette of Wisconsin, providing for the recon- 
sideration of cases which were alleged to have been 
hurriedly considered, and in which the applicants were 
denied enrollment, during the so-called "Rush Period," 
immediately prior to the closing of the rolls on March 4, 
1907. 

During the course of the arguments the attorneys for 
the claimants presented to the committee the names of 
many applicants, whose cases the attorneys alleged 
merited reconsideration. In each specific case the 
attorneys stated that the claimants were legally entitled 
to enrollment and had been denied right to enrollment 



16" 

through no fault of theirs but by reason of the inefficiency 
of the United States Government in determining the 
rights of the applicants. 

The amendment was refused by the committee. It 
was offered again on the floor of the Senate.. The 
Indian Appropriation Bill did not come before the 
Senate for consideration until a few hours before the 
adjournment of Congress. The passage of the bill was 
greatly delayed by a filibuster conducted by Senator 
Gronna. Senator Gronna, and others, opposed the 
provision in the bill authorizing a distribution of Choctaw 
and Chickasaw funds. They stated that no distribution 
should be made until after a great many claims for 
citizenship, enumerated by them, had been reconsidered. 
I will omit the details in regard to the procedure prior 
to the passage of the bill. 

The bill finally passed the Senate carr\nng a provision 
authorizing a per capita payment. The provisions 
authorizing the payment had theretofore passed the 
House. After the bill had been agreed to in conference 
and had again passed the Senate it did not reach the 
House of Representatives in time to be acted upon before 
the adjournment of Congress. This was the second 
Indian Appropriation Bill that failed of passage by 
reason of the opposition to the provision authorizing, 
a distribution of Choctaw and Chickasaw funds. 

I have examined the Choctaw cases referred to by Mr. 
Ballinger and IV^r. Field, in their arguments before the 
committee, and I have not found among the applicants, 
to whom they refer, one person who is legally or equitably 
entitled to enrollment as a citizen of the Choctaw Nation. 
I have written briefs in each of the cases which they 
referred to. These briefs have not been called for by 
the committee. The committee seemed to be satisfied 
in regard to the merits of these cases. The briefs are too 
numerous and too voluminous to be set forth in this 



17 

report t)ut are available in the event these cases are 
hereafter considered. 

During the year, 1915, Mr. Webster Ballinger and his 
associates, through their agents and through the firm 
of Ballinger, Lindley <fe Rodkey, attorneys at law of 
Muskogee, Oklahoma, took applications of a great 
number of persons whom thej^ claimed were entitled to 
enrollment as citizens of the different tribes of the 
Five Civilized Tribes. Mr. Ballinger served upon me as 
attorney for the Choctaw Nation the petitions of two 
hundred and fifty (250) persons claiming right to enroll- 
ment. 

The Indian Appropriation Bill carrying the appropria- 
tions for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1916, having 
failed to pass, a resolution was passed ejctending the 
appropriation of the former year. 

The Indian Appropriation Bill carrying appropriations 
for the fiscal j^ear ending June 30, 1917, was reported out 
of the Committee on Indian Affairs of the House of 
Representatives carrying a provision authorizing a per 
capita payment of $200 to the Chickasaws and $300 
to the Choctaws. The difference in the amount paid to 
the members of each tribe is due to the fact that the 
Chickasaws have heretofore received a paynient of $100 
more than the Choctaws out of the joint funds of the 
two tribes. 

This provision authorized the distribution of practi- 
cally all the cash to the credit of the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Indians, arising from the sale of the residue 
of their estate. There is, of course, a great amount of 
tribal property j^et unsold and a considerable amount 
due on property which has been sold. This provision 
met with the opposition: 

First. Of all those who advocated the reopening 
of the rolls. 

Second. The friends of the Mississippi Choc- 



IS 

taws who contended for enrollment, by special act,, 
of all persons whose names appear upon the so 
called McKennon rolls. 

Third, Those who advocated the reconsidera- 
tion of all the cases passed upon by the officials 
of the Interior Department during the so-called 
"rush period," immediately prior to the closing 
of the rolls on March 4, 1907. 

Fourth. Those who advocated a law authorizing 
the Department of the Interior to receive and 
consider and act upon petitions of persons who 
had never theretofore made application for 
enrollment. 

Fifth. In addition to this opposition, were those 
who did not understand the questions involved 
and were opposed to the distribution of funds 
for the reason that they feared that after the 
distribution of Choctaw and Chickasaw funds, 
the claimants for citizenship might possibly 
make and prevail in a claim against the United 
States Government. 

It may easily be understood that all these factions 
constituted a very formidable opposition to the provi- 
sion authorizing a per capita payment. 

Great sympathy had been aroused by Mr. Ballinger 
and his associates for persons thay claimed were Indians 
who had not made application because of their opposi- 
tion to allotment in severalty. They contended that 
these Indians resided in Oklahoma and were among 
what is known as the "Snake" faction who opposed the 
change in the title of their property from ownership in 
common to allotment in severalty and had declined to 
take allotment. Such allegations very naturally ai'oused 
sympathy in favor of the applicants. 

Mr. Ballinger and his associates and their agents took 
petitions from these alleged Indians whom they claimed 
had been erroneously omitted from the Choctaw rolls. 
Each petition was subscribed and sworn to by the appli- 
cant, or applicants, and was invariably supported by 



19 

tlie alffidavits of two or more persons who were alleged 
to be disinterested. The petitions and the corroborating 
affidavits, in each instance, made out a strong prima facie 
case in favor of the applicant, or applicants. 

It seems that Mr. Ballinger filed the original of these 
petitions in the Indian Office at Washington, D, C. He 
served a duplicate eopy upon me as Attornej^ for the 
Choctaw Nation, 

At the time these petitions were filed in the Indian 
Office I called the attention of the Indian Office to the 
fact that in my opinion the office was not authorized, 
under law, to receive the petitions. 1 do not care to 
discuss in this report the controversy which ensued 
between the Indian Office and myself on account of my 
cc^tention that the Indian Office w^as not authorized 
to receive the Ballinger petitions. Subsequent events, 
I believe, have vindicated the position which I took in 
the matter and I am convinced that my representations 
to the Indian Office, in regrad to the law in the matter, 
were correct. 

Upon receiving the duplicate copies of the petitions 
from Mr, Ballinger I immediately^ entered upon an in- 
vestigation of the same. I asked that an Inspector from 
the Interior Department be assigned to me for the pur- 
pose of assisting me in the investigation. Hon, Gabe E. 
Parker, Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes, 
at Muskogee, Oklahoma, detailed Mr. Wm. L. Bowie, 
an inspector, to assist in this work. 

The investigation which followed developed that the 
petitions filed by Mr, Ballinger for his clients did not 
state the truth. It developed that each false petition 
was supported by false affidavits. It was shown that a 
great many of the corroborating affidavits were made 
by illiterate negroes who signed by mark and who served 
Mr. Ballinger and his associates as professional witnesses. 

A full statement of the facts developed is set forth in 



20 

a report made by Mr. Wm. L. Bowie. The report of Mr. 
Bowie is attached hereto and marked Part 1 1 . 

PART 12. 

While the Indian Appropriation Bill for the fiscal 
year ending June 30, 1917, was pending before the 
Committee on Indian Affairs of the Senate, Mr. Bal- 
linger appeared before the committee in an attempt to 
prevent the adoption of the provision authorizing the 
per capita payment and also asked to be allowed to defend 
himself against the accusations contained in the Bowie 
report. The Bowie report seriously questioned the pro- 
fessional conduct of Mr. Ballinger and his associates. 

In his argument before the committee Mr. Ballinger 
confined himself largelj^ to an attack upon the nature 
of Mr. Bowie's tenure of office and an attack upon 
myself. He offered no argument of a substantial nature 
to refute the charges of fraud made against him and his 
associates in the Bowie report. He did not offer any 
evidence that would tend to absolve him from the re- 
sponsibility of the transactions of the firm of Ballinger, 
Lindley & Rodkey, and their associates. He had no evi- 
dence to show that the petitions and affidavits filed by 
him in the Indian Office were not false as they were 
alleged to be in the Bowie report. 

I was given twenty minutes within which to reply to 
jMr. Ballinger's statement. My reply was very brief, 
I submitted for the consideration of the conmiittee, and 
for publication in the record, ten cases in which petitions 
had been served upon me by Mr. Ballinger. I asked that 
these cases be taken in their regular consecutive order, 
so that I would not be charged with having selected the 
most flagrantly fraudulent cases which had been pre- 
sented. I was given permission by the^ committee to 
make these ten cases a part of the record. 

My reply to Mr. Ballinger and the record of the ten 
cases refereed to arc attached hereto and marked Part 12. 



21 

PART 13. 

While the Indian Appropriation Bill for the fiscal year 
ending June 30, 1917, was pending before the Senate, 
Senator Robert L. Owen, introduced a brief outline of 
the history of the citizenship litigation containing argu- 
ments in opposition to the re-opening of the rolls and 
in favor of the provision authorizing a per capita payment. 
This brief history of the case was prepared by me. It 
has since been printed in the form of a document. 

A copy of said document is attached hereto and marked 
Part 13. 

PART 14. 

The Indian Appropriation Bill for the fiscal 3"ear 
ending June 30, 1917, carrying a provision authorizing 
a per capita payment of $200 to the Chickasaws and 
$300 to the Choctaws became a law on the 18th day of 
May, 1916. (See Public No. 80.) 

Copy of said bill is attached hereto and marked 
Part 14- 

The enactment of this provision ends a prolonged 
controversy. The distribution of funds belonging to the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations has been unreasonab)}^ 
delayed. The cause of the delay, as shown by this 
report, is due to the opposition of the attorneys for 
persons claiming right to enrollment. 

Under the terms of the agreement between the United 
States and the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations which 
was approved by Act of Congress July 1, 1902, and 
ratified by the Choctaw and Chickasaw people on the 
25th day of September, 1902, the United States is 
bound by solemn obligations to sell the residue of tribal 
propertj^ and to distribute the proceeds arising therefrom 
among the persons, and the heirs of persons, whose 
names appear upon the approved rolls of the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations. 

Because of the great amount involved and because 



22 

of the importance of an early settlement of this con- 
troversy, I have compiled this brief history of the 
questions involved. It required much research to procure 
the facts for the different documents set forth herein. 
For that reason I have thought it advisable to make 
this compilation in order that this history may be 
available to those defending the Choctaw and Cliickasaw 
Nations in the event the advocates of the reopening of 
the rolls should, in the future, attempt to reopen this 
controversy. 

In closing I call attention to the fact that the records 
which I am setting forth here are largely the records 
which I have made in this controversy, as attorney for 
the Choctaw Nation, before the committees of Congress. 
I have set forth the argument of Mr. Bond, attorney for 
the Chickasaw Nation, for the reason that the same is a 
very material part of the record before the committees 
and it is set forth for the purpose of showing that the 
interest of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations in this 
controversy are identical. 

During the course of the controversy manj^ able 
arguments were made on the floor of both Houses. 

Attention is called to the able manner in which this 
controversy was handled by members of the Oklahoma 
Delegation in Congress and members of Congress from 
other States during the different times that the question 
was under consideration before the House and Senate. 
I am not setting forth these arguments in this report for 
the reason that to do so would be only to repeat almost 
entirely the record and arguments which are herein 
set forth. 

Services performed by me during the last quarter, 
not involving citizenship questions, will be made the 
subject of a separate report. 

Respectfully submitted. 

P. J. HURLEY, 
National Attorney for the Choctaw Nation. 



Part Two 



REPORT AND STATEMENT 



OF THE 



SUBCOMMITTEE OF 
THE COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ON 

H. R. 19213 



JANUARY 10, 1913 






WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

1913 



SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS. 
House of Representatives. 

JOSEPH J. RUSSELL. CHARLES B. SMITH. 

CLARENCE B. MILLER. 



REPORT A.ND STATEMENT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 
COMMFrTEE Ox\ LXDIAIS AFFAIRS. 



Committee on Indian Affairs, 

House of Representatives, 
Washingto7i, D. C.^ January 10. 1913. 
The subcommittee appointed to discuss House bill 19'2]3 met this 
day. Hon. J. J. Russell (chairman) presiding. 

STATEMENT OF HON. J. J. RUSSELL, REPRESENTATIVE FROM 

MISSOURI. 

Mr. Russell. Mr. Chairman, your subcommittee to which was 
referred House bill 19213, introduced by Mr. Harrison of Mississippi, 
of which subcommittee I was made chairman, desires to submit its 
report. 

Your committee has agreed upon a report, and I will submit the 
same in writing, after giving briefly my own conclusions and the 
reasons that haA e led me to such conclusions. 

I desire to say in advance that Mr. Miller, a member of the sub- 
committee, has had so much more experience in Indian affairs and 
is so much better informed upon questions pertaining to their inter- 
ests that I have requested him to make the principal investigation of 
the questions involved, and he has done so with great diligence and, 
I think, exhaustively, and your committee relies very largely upon 
his investigation and his judgment in the matter, and he will state 
more in detail the facts and the record from which our conclusions 
have been formed, and perhaps Mr. Smith, the other member of the 
committee, will also give to this committee his views separately. 

As I understand the purpose of this bill, it was introduced and is 
now being pressed for (he i)urpose of attempting to correct what was 
claimed to have been an injustice done to certain Mississippi Choc- 
taws, whose rights, it is chiimed, under article 14 of the treaty of 1830. 
have been disregarded. 

As I understand from the hearings before your subconunittee, and 
what investigation I have been otherwise able to make, that said sec- 
tion 14 of the treaty of 1830 was incorporated in the treaty at the 
instance of the Mississippi Choctaws, who desired to remain in the 
State of Mississip|)i and not to be requii'ed to move west, and this sec- 
tion, after making certain ])rovisions for them, clearly provided by 
its express terms that they might remain in Mississippi without los- 



4 EEPOET AXD STATEMENT ON H. R. 19213. 

ing their privileoes as Choctaw citizens, but that in case they should 
remove they woukl lose their interests in the annuities. 

So this section clearly intended to permit them to remain in Missis- 
sij^pi. and not only did not require them to remove but provided for 
punishment if they should remove. This same section of the said 
treaty provided that the Choctaws might signify their intention to 
take the benefits granted by that section within six months after the 
ratification of the treaty, and I understand that 143 did receive 
iiatents to lands under its provisions, but that many thousands of 
them who were entitled to the same privileges failed to obtain them, 
and it is now claimed by the proponents of this bill, and, so far as 
my investigation has gone, it is by no one disputed, that the reason a 
great number of others did not signify their intentions and receive 
patents Avas on account of the reprehensible conduct, if not the delib- 
erate design, of a Mr. Ward, who was sent there as the Government's 
agent to receive the applications from the Choctaws. 

From my investigation it appears that the right given to the ISIis- 
sissippi Choctaw Indians to remain in that State without forfeiting 
their rights as Choctaw citizens has been recognized by the Choctaw 
Xation in the West on several occasions since, and as late as 1898 
this right Avas recognized by what is known as the Curtis Act, and 
under this act, in 1809, 4.192 of the eastern Choctaws were identified. 

But what is known as the McMurray Act of 1902, for the first time 
disregarded article 14 of the treaty of 1830, and provided that the 
Mississippi Choctaws could not be enrolled unless they removed West 
within six months, and, further, that no one should be enrolled unless 
:' descendant of a Mississippi ChoctaAv who received a patent to land 
under the said treaty of 1830. 

This act f(u- the first time, as I understand, made a distinction l)e- 
tween those who actually received patents and those who had not re- 
ceived patents under the said treaty. Your committee is unable to 
see any good reason for a distinction between those who received a 
l)atent and those who were entitled to receive patents, especially when 
it appears, as we think it does in this case, that their failure to receive 
])atents was by reason of no fault of theirs, but it seems more ]5rob- 
able that it was a neglect of duty, if not the vicious misconduct of 
the (Tovernment agent, that prevented them from doing so. 

I also understand that a suit was brought by the Choctaw Nation 
west to recover damages from the United States because of certain 
lights that they had under the treaty of 1830 and for lands sold by 
ihe Government which had been surrendered by the Mississippi Choc- 
taws, and that suit resulted in the recovery of nearly $3,000,000, 
which, with interest, amounting to approxinuitely $8,000,000, was, 
as I understand it, paid to the ChoctaAV Nation west, and no pait 
of the same ever paid to or enjoyed by the Mississippi Choctaws, for 
Avhose redress the suit was instituted and the recovery had. 

So your subcommittee believes that a great injustice has been done 
ihe ^lississippi Choctaws, but I recognize that it is a very compli- 
cated (luestion, and I do not feel able to suggest the form of a bill to 
grant relief, but your committee preferred to submit to you our re- 
port for your approval or disapproval, believing that if your com- 
mittee should concur in the findings that we have made vou can 



EEPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. E. 19213. 5 

then prepare or cause to be prepared a suitable measure in accordance 
Avith such findings. 

Our written report is as follows: 

Your subconnnittee, to which was referred H. R. 19213, having ex- 
tensively considered the same, is of the opinion and recommends: 

First. That a considerable number of Indians not enrolled are enti- 
tled to the benefits of Choctaw citizenship. 

Second. That members of the following two classes are entitled to 
such benefits : 

{(() All full-blood Choctaws. 

{0) All mixed-blood Choctaws, who can prove descent from an 
ancestor who received or was entitled to receive a patent to lands 
under article 14 of the treaty of 1830. 

Third. That the Secretary of the Interior be recjuested to furnish 
this committee from records in his possession or under his con- 
trol, and within nine months from the date hereof, a list of those who 
comprise the two above-named classes and who are not enrolled as 
Choctaws. 

JvE J. Kl SSELL. 

CiiAiJLES B. Smith. 
C. B. Miller. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CLARENCE B. MILLER, A REPRESENTATIVE 

FROM MINNESOTA. 

]Mr. Miller. All the bills that have been introduced on the subject 
of the Mississippi Choctaws, among them being the one now under 
consideration (H. R. 19213), looked to the treaty of 1830, between the 
Choi taws and the United States, as a basis for all Mississippi Choc- 
law rights. A thorough understanding of the rights involved re- 
quires, however, that we pay attention to an earlier treaty, and a 
most important one, the treaty of 1820. During the time tlie terri- 
tory involved was under the jurisdiction of Great Britain several 
arrangements that Avere looked upon as treaties were made between 
the King of Great Britain and the Choctaw Xation. These, however, 
are unim})ortant. as also were the subsequent treaties between the 
Choctaw Xation and the United States up to the treaty of 1S20. 

In 1820 we find the Choctaw Xation occupying approxin)ately 
l-l:,2r)0,000 acres in what is now the State of Mississippi, a small part, 
however, extending into Louisiana. 

In 1820 the United States desired to have as nuiny Indians as possi- 
ble removed west of the Mississippi, and it then negotiated treaties with 
these Choctaw Indians looking to their removal. By the terms of that 
treaty the Choctaw Xation ceded to the United States al)out 4,000,000 
acres of their laud in Mississii)pi, as consideration for which and in 
l)art payuient thereof the United States ceded to the Choctaws a tract 
of liind west of the Mississippi Ri\er. roughly bounded on the north 
by t!ie Arkansas and its nuiin branch, the Canadian River, extending 
west to the source of the Canadian River, should that source be found 
to be within the territory of the I'nited States, and if without such 
territory, then to the limits of the territory of the United States; on 
the south Ijy the Red River: and on the east by a line that included a- 
.^uiall part of what is now the western part of Arkansas. This com- 



6 REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. E. 19213. 

]:)risos all the land that the Choctaws or Chickasaws ever secured west 
of the Mississippi Kiver and which they have since occupied. Parts 
(if this oi'onnd Avere lost by later treaties, the Indians ceding parts to 
the T'nited States. 

An inspection of this treaty discloses that it was not contemplated 
l»y the parties that all of the Choctaws should remove west, or even 
ihat the jz'i-eater part of them should remove. In fact, it clearly ap- 
peal's tluit it was contemplated that only a relatively small part would 
remove west, the main part remaining on their diminished reserva- 
t ion, now consisting of a little over 10,000,000 acres in Mississippi. 

The pertinent sections of that treaty to the present inquiry are the 
following: 

Article 1. To enable the President of the United States to carry into effect 
Uie above jirand and humane objects, the uiingoes, liead men, and warriors of 
(lie Clioctaw Nation, in full council assembled, in behalf of tliemselves and the 
_ said nation, do by these presents cede to the T'nited States of America all the 
land lyin^' and beins witliin the boundaries followiui;. to wit: P>efiinnins on the 
Clioclaw homidary. east of Pearl River, at a point due south of the White Oak 
Si>rin,i,'. on the ohl Indian path; tlience nortli to said spring: tlience northwardly 
to a i)lack oak standing on tlie Natchez road, about 40 poles eastwardly from 
IJoake's fence, marked A. .T. and blazed, with two large pines and a black oak 
.standing near tliereto and marked as pointers; thence a straight line to the head 
of Black Creek, or Bouge Loosa ; thence down Black Creek or Bouge I.oosa to 
a small lake; tlience a direct course so as to strilve the Mississippi 1 mile below 
the mouth of the Arkansas River; thence down the Mississippi to our boundary ; 
thence around and along the same to the beginning. 

Art. 2. For and in consideration of the foregoing cession on the part of the 
Choctaw Nation, and in i)art satisfaction for tlie same, the commissioners of 
the United States, in behalf of said States, do hereby cede to said nation a tract- 
of country west of the Mississippi River, situate between the Arkansas and 
Red Rivers, and bounded as follows: Beginning on the Arkansas River where 
the lower boundary line of the Cherokees strikes the same; thence up the 
Arkansas to the Canadian Fork, and up tlie same to its source; thence due 
south to the Red River; thence down Red River .j miles below the mouth of 
Tattle River, which enii)ties itself into Red River on the north side; thence a 
direct line to the beginning. 

* :;= * * « * =:■ 

Art. 4. The boundaries hereby established between the Choctaw Indians and 
the I'nite<l States on tliis side of the Mississii)pi River shall remain without 
alteration until the jieriod at which said nation shall become so civilized and 
enlightened as to be made citizens of the United States, and Congress shall lay 
off a limited parcel of land for the benefit of each family or individual in tlie 
nation. 

Art. 5. For the purjiose of aiding and assisting the poor Indians who wish 
to remove to the country hereby ceded on the part of the United States, and to 
enable them to do well and sumiort their families, the commissionei-s of the 
United States engage, in behalf of said States, to give to each warrior a blanket, 
kettle, ritie gun, bullet molds and nippers, and aminunition snthcient for hunt- 
ing and defense for one year. Said warrior shall also be supplied with corn 
to support him and his family for the same iieriod and whilst traveling to the 
country above ceded to the Choctaw Nation. 

.Vrt.C. The commissioners of the United States further covenant and agree, 
on the part of said States, that an agent shall be appointed in due time for the 
benefit of the Choctaw Indians who may be permanently settled in tlie country 
cedeil to them beyond the Mississippi River, and at a convenient period a factor 
shall be sent there witli goods to supi)ly their wants. A l)lacksmith shall also 
be sotthnl amongst them, at a point most convenient to the population, and a 
faithful person appointed whose duty it shall be to use every reasonable exer- 
tion to collect all the wandering Indians belonging to the Choctaw Nation upon 
tho ];uid hereby i)rovided for tlieir permanent settlement. 

Art. 7. Out of the lands ceded by the Choctaw Nation to the United States. 
the commissioners aforesaid, in behalf of said States, further covenant and 
agi-ee that 54 sections of "I mile square shall be laid out in good land by the 



REPORT AXD STATEMENT OX H. R. 19213. 7 

President of the I'liited Stntes and sold, for the imriK)se of raising a fund 
to be appHed to the support of the Choctaw schools on both sides of the 
Mississippi River. Three-fourths of said fund shall he a])propriated for tlie 
henetit of the schools here, and the reniaininir fourth for tlie esta])lishnient 
of one or more beyond the Mississiitjii. the whole to be placed in tlie hands of 
the President of tlie United States and to be ajiplied by him. expresslj' and 
exclusively, to this valuable object. 

Article 4 provides that the boundaries established by this treaty 
for the lands in Missi^>sippi shall remain without alteration; that is. 
the Indians shall retain their 10.000,000 aci'es intact until such time 
as the Indians shall become so civilized and enlightened as to be 
made citizens of the United States. It then contemplates that Con- 
gress shall allot to each family a portion of this territory. 

Article 5 provides something for the removal of those who are to 
o-Q west. It appears to contemplate that the poor Indians are the 
ones likely to remove, and provision is made to give each of these 
Indians a feAv things that may help him to make the journey. 

Article O makes provision for organization of Federal aid to the 
Indians who remove beyond the Mississippi River, jDroviding, as it 
does, for the establishment of an agent there, also a blacksmi.th and 
other officers. 

Article 7 contemplates that lands shall be sold, specifying the 
lands, the proceeds from which are to be used for the support of 
Choctaw schools on both sides of the Mississippi, three-fourths of 
the fund to be expended for the benefit of schools east of the Mis- 
sissippi Eiver and one-fourth for the benefit of those west of the 
Mississippi River. If this can be taken as a basis of what was then 
contemplated by the parties should be the respective portions of the 
Indians residing east and west, it would show that three-fourths were 
expected to remain in ^lississippi and one-fourth to remove west. 

In 1825 the United States Government, desiring to secure a strip 
of land forming the eastern extremity of the lands ceded to the 
Choctaw Indians west of the Mississippi River, entered into a treaty 
with that nation by which all of that ceded territory which is now 
within the State of Arkansas was ceded to the United States Gov- 
ernment. Since that time the western boundary of Arkansas has 
been the eastern boundary of this Indian country west of the 
Mississippi River. 

During this period a rapid development in the Southwest has taken 
])lace. The United States had secured Florida, which then extended 
clear up practically to the Mississippi RiA^er. It was trying to re- 
move, and had removed westward, many of the Seminoles. who were 
removed to a section of territory near to that ceded to the Choctaws 
west of the Mississippi River. \A^liites were pressing into the South- 
west. After the Louisiana Purchase of 180;Uthe Southwest region 
had become generally known to people in the East, and inmiigrants 
were pouring in that direction rapidly. As a consequence of this 
influx of white settlers there was a desire on the part of the United 
Staters, responding to the wishes of these settlers, to remove all of the 
Indians Avest of the ^Mississippi River. The State of Mississippi 
desired to relieve itself of the Indians within its borders. Conse- 
quently, the Government undertook a treaty with the Choctaw Na- 
tion looking to a cession of all their Missi.ssipjii lands. The negotia- 
tions for this proceeded for many years without any success, the 



8 REPORT AND STATEMENT OX H. R. 19213. 

Indians, obstinately and with complete accord and determination, re- 
fusing to give up their Mississippi lands or to remove West. F'inally, 
in the extremity of the situation, one of the Indian leaders, whose 
name was Greenwood Le Flore, came to the United States commis- 
sioners and said if they would let him formulate a new paragi-aph in 
the treatv' he could get the whole ratified within a A'ery few hours. 
They asked him what his paragraph was. He thereupon suggested, 
and there was written, what became paragraph 14, or article 14, of 
the treaty of 1830. This article is as follows : 

Each Choctaw head of a family, being desirous to remain and become a citizen 
of the States, shall be permitted to do so by signifying his intention to tlie agent 
within six months from the ratification of this treaty, and he or she shall there- 
upon be entitled to a reservation of one section of 640 acres of land, to be 
bounded by sectional lines of survey; in like manner, shall be entitled to one-hiilf 
tliat quantity for each unmarried child which is of age and a quarter section 
to such child as may be under 10 years of age, to adjoin the location of the par- 
ent. If they reside upon said lands, intending to become citizens of the States, 
for five years after the ratification of this treaty, in that case a grant in fee 
simple shall issue. Said reservation shall include the present improvement of 
the head of tlie family, or a portion of it. Persons who claim under tliis article 
shall not lose the privileges of a Choctaw citizen, but if they ever remove are 
not to be entitled to any portion of tlie Choctaw annuity. 

After the insertion of this article the treaty was quickly ratified by 
the Indians, and Avas finally approved September 27, 1830, and thus 
became the basis of the rights of the Choctaw Nation. This article 
is the important one of the treaty. It provides that any Choctaw In- 
dian who desires to remain in Mississippi and not remove west can 
elect to do so within six months; by making application so stating 
his desire to remain he shall be entitled to receive 640 acres as head 
of his family; each adult member of his family — or, rather, each 
person over 10 years of age unmarried — to receive 320 acres and each 
child under 10 years 160 acres. After a continuous residence upon 
such selected tracts for a period of five years patent in fee was to 
issue. Further, and especially, it provides that any such Indian elect- 
ing to remain in Mississippi shall not lose his Choctaw citizenship ; 
the only thing he ever will lose is his right to share in the annuities 
coming from the Government to the Choctaw Nation, and these he 
will lose only if he removes from his then Mississippi home west of 
the Mississippi River. 

Just what these annuities consisted in, their source and amount, 
have not been ascertained at the present time with definiteness. At 
my request the Secretary of the Interior is making a thorough in- 
vestigation, and subsequently he will report all the information 
obtainable by his office on this point. The only annuity that I can 
find that must have been contemplated by the Indians and the Gov- 
ernment was an annuity of $20,000, payable under the terms of this 
treaty of 1830 for a period of 20 years thereafter. At all events, it 
seems to be generally agreed by both parties to the treaty and by 
all who have commented u]:>on the treaty since, that the amount of 
these annuities was small — in fact, so small as not to be of serious 
consideration. 

It nnist thus be clearly understood that those Indians who elected 
to I'emain in Mississippi continued to be Choctaw citizens, with all 
of the rights possessed by Choctaw citizens anywhere. 



REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. R. 19213. 9 

At this point it may be well to observe that while the Choctaw 
Nation has made many treaties subsequent to the treaty of 1830 with 
the United States Government, when those treaties were made the 
irreat bulk of the Choctaws had removed w^est of the Mississippi 
River — not all on the lands ceded to them by the treaty of 1820, 
some of them beinc; scattered in other sections; but the great ma- 
jority were west of the river, and the treaties were really between 
the representatives of the western Choctaws and the United States; 
in fact, there is not to be found any evidence that the Mississippi 
ChoctaAvs remaining east of the river since 18?>0 have ever made any 
kind of an agTeement or been a party to any kind of an agreement 
Avith the United States Government. They were in the nature of 
individuals outside who were not directly consulted in the making 
of the subsequent treaties, although many provisions in these treaties 
were for their benefit. 

By the terms of this treaty of 1830 the Choctaw Nation ceded to 
the United States Government all their remaining lands east of the 
river. These lands comprised about 10.200.000 acres. After these 
heads of families who had elected to remain east of the river should 
I'eceive their respective allotments or tracts of land, becoming theirs 
by ])atents in fee after a residence of five years, the remainder should 
be entirely the property of the United States, and no longer should 
there be Indian territory in Mississippi. 

Nowhere in this treaty was there any consideration mentioned as 
]iassing from the United States to the Indians for this last cession 
of their 10.000.000 acres. It was undoubtedly contemplated by the 
United States Government to remove all the Choctaws west of the 
river. The object in negotiating the treaty, in the first place, was 
to get them all west of the river. The provision allowing certain 
ones to remain east of the river had only been inserted to secure an 
ado]:)tion of the general treaty. Apparently they had no idea of the 
number who w^ould elect to remain and take advantage of article 14. 
At all events, nothing was done by the United States Government 
to enable those who desired to make application to remain east of 
the river until the following spring. At this time the Indian affairs 
of the country were under the jurisdiction of the War Department 
and officers of the Army were generally Indian agents. The Indian 
agent for this region in Mississip])i was Col. William "Ward. 

■^On May 21, 1831, the Indian Office forwarded to Col. AVard in- 
structions to receive applications from Choctaws who desired to 
elect under article 14. His instructions were as follows : 

You \vi]] he careful in koei>inff a re.iristor of the reservatious taken under the 
Iburteenth article of the treaty, a fair copy of which to he made, duly certitied. 
and transmitted for the information of the dei)artnieni. 

This is the official instruction and the only one that can be foiuid. 
It has been said — or surmised, perhaps, Avoidd be a better term — 
that, apart from this official instruction of Col. Ward, was a secret 
instruction, not made public, to the effect that he should get as many 
Indians as possible to remove west ; and in doing that, of course, pre- 
vent, as far as ])Ossible, the Indians from availing themselves of the 
provisions of article 14. At all events the testimony of all j)arties 
who have investigated the acts of Col. Ward is unanimous respecting 
his conduct. He certainly did everything in his power to prevent 
Choctaw Indians from remaining in Mississippi. It is to be under- 



10 REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. R. 1921:]. 

^tood thixt the Intliaiis had six months from and after September 27^ 
J 830, in whicli to make their aj^plication. There Avas no Avay in 
Avhich they could make their applications prior to the latter part of 
May, 1831. No applications were permitted to be made after the 
latter part of Au^'ust, 1831. The register which Col. AYard prepared 
hhows that the first application was registered April 18, 1831 ; the 
last August '23, 1831: and his certificate is of date August 24, 1831; 
thus not longer than four months did the Indians have in whicli to 
make application. 

The Indians began to come in in large numbers to make their ap- 
]:)lications. Apparently the number was vastly gi-eater than had been 
anticipated or was desired. They were treated in an outrageons 
manner by Col. Ward. He often angrily drove them from his pres- 
ence. He either started or at least sanctioned the circulation among 
the Indians of stories that those who remained would be subjected to 
persecution by the whites, and would even lo^e their children. To an 
Indian his child is his dearest i:)OSsession. He may not think much of 
his father or his mother and have no regard whatever for his grand- 
father or grandmother, but he thinks everything of his child. This 
would strike terror to an Indian if anything on earth would. These 
Indians were, of course, unlettered, and while they have been called 
civilized, the term can hardly be applied to them without being given 
a very liberal interpretation. They could not speak English and, 
after Indian fashion, conveyed their ideas symbolically. For in- 
stance, a common method of making application by the head of a 
family would be for such head to appear before Col. Ward with a 
bundle of sticks — one long stick representing himself; somewhat 
shorter sticks representing the members of his family above the age 
of 10: then some little short sticks representing the children under 10. 
The colonel generally received these sticks and promptly made bon- 
fires of them. 

It was. of course, expected that he would keep a record of the 
names of the applicants and the members of their family for whom 
application Avas made. It seems that something like a list was kept. 
It AA'as kept on loose sheets of legal-cap paper. It Avas not found 
for some tinw afterAvards, and Avhen found many pages Avere gone; 
and the testimony of those present showed that the missing pages 
werejir(;bably those the colonel had used as shaving paper. It seeiiia 
that a large number of the sheets of this list were used for that pur- 
pose. It further appears that CoU Ward Avas often intoxicated, 
and at siu-h times was exceedingly harsh and abusive to the Indians. 
In sh< rt, his treatment probably forms as bad a chapter as can be 
found anyAvliere in the history of Indian affairs since the wdiitcs 
settled America. 

The ChoctaAvs Avere not hostile to the Avhites, had never made 
Avar against the Avhites, but had been the staunch friends of the 
whites. They had remained sturdy AA'hen a general Indian uprising 
had been fomented by certain Indian tribes a feAV years after the 
Ivevolutionary War. UpAvard of 2,000 ChoctaAv Avarriors are said 
to have marched under Andrew Jackson and fought at the Battle 
of XcAv Oi'leans. There certainly Avas no stigma to be cast upon the 
Indians because they chose to remain in Mississippi, where had been 
the homes of their fathers, and Avhere their other ancestors weie 
buried. Under the treaty of 1830 they had an absolute right to eleci. 



EEPORT AND STATEMENT OX H. R. 19213. 11 

to remain if they saw fit. and, in fact, Avoukl not ha^e made that 
treaty Iiad this opportnnity not been accorded them. Therefore it 
seems to me that tlie treatment extended to these Indians by (\ol. 
Ward at this time was such as to recjuire that most careful attention 
he given to any rights that can clearly be ascertained in favor of 
these Indians who were at that time defrauded. 

In ISoT, and again in 1842, investigations were had of th.e conduct 
of Col. Ward. These investigations were rather extensive, and re- 
l)orts thereof were duly filed. It is from these reports that the fore- 
going statements h.ave been made respecting the conduct of Col. 
Ward. 

A Government agent, Mr. (jeorge W. ]\Iartin, under date of Sej)- 
tember 11, 1833, made a report to the department respecting the con- 
dition found among the Choctaws in Mississippi, as far as the 
fourteenth article claimants were concerned. In this report he said: 

I am unich disappointed in not being able to secure such copies and infornia- 
liou as seems to have been anticipated by tlae department. Col. Ward says 
there are no entire and perfect copies of the re.sjisters and reservations retained 
here, and advised me to a]iply to the department. I shall secure such papers 
here as may enable me to proceed in the loeatiu-.ir. but I am certain the work 
can not be done in a complete and perfect manner unless I am furnished with 
a more full re,i;ister. as the one here is incomplete. 

Again, under date of October 3, 1833. this same agent made a 
report to Andrew Jackson, tlien President of the United States, in 
which he said : 

I am pro.ffressiug with the Itusiness by means of the register obtained from 
< 'ol. Ward, but it is probal)le there are many names omitted on this reuister 
which are entitled to land agreeably to the register or list of reserves for- 
warded to the War Dejjartment by Mr. Armstrong. Such was the opinion of 
-Mr. William Armstrong, who was present at the time I applied for and re- 
ceived the register on which I am now acting, which I adverted to in my com- 
munication to you of the 11th ultimo. 

Again, under date of December 20, 1834, the Government agent 
reported to the War Department in the folloAving language : 

In obedience to instrncticms, 1 have caused all the testimony ottered lo be 
taken in writing, under oath, and in due form of law. A list of the names 
of the witnesses is annexed to this report, and copies of the deixjsitions them- 
selves are herewith transniilted, the originals being retained for the use of Ibis 
otlice. The instructions reipiire that I should report the facts and circumstances 
submitted to me. P>y a reference to the ]ia]»ers it will I)e seen that the deposi- 
tions estalilish the following facts, xiz: 

First. That within tlie tim(> limited l)y the treaty for registration, on one 
iiccasion a numlter of Indians, then living on Snckenatchie. and some of them 
living yet <ai the same, did actually go forwanl to the agent, then at the Old 
Factory, for this and other purposes, and did not only offer their names for 
legistration. l»ut tlieir names were duly and formally entered down in a book 
opened for that purpose: nevertheless, a few, if any, of the names then and at 
that i)lace taken down, are now to lie found in the agent's book in my ])ossession. 
The conclusion is inevitabl(> that the small book or sheet of paper on which 
their names were entered has lieen either lost by the agent or destroyed ))y 
those who might possibly wish the Indians to emigi-ate. It ajipears that a iior- 
tion of these Indians have since gone away, while others remain on their lands 
and now c<»ntend for liieir claims. 

Second. That there are instances where individuals went forward and had 
their names enteied down on the book, and yet they were aftei'wai'ds erased or 
blotted oat by i)ossiltly those who had free access to the agent's Itooks. 

Third, It further a])i)ears from the testimony of several witnesses of un(pies- 
lionable character that in the month of .June, l.s;jl, a number of ln<lians at- 
tended at the council house for the purpose of entering their names lo become 



12 REPORT AXD STATEMENT ON H. R. 19213. 

citizens and talce lands. Beinji ij^noi'nnt of tlu' Engiisli language, they appointed 
one or two headmen or leaders to go foi'ward for them and give in their names 
acccn-dingly. As is customary among the Indians, they collected a j)arcel of 
small sticks, designating 'the number of them that wished to register. With 
tJiese sticks in their hands, the spokesmen went u]) to the agent and gave them 
in, at the same time informing the agent, through the interpreter, that these 
sticks showed the nnmher they came forward to give in. and that they would 
give the name of each head of families, the number and ages of their children. 
It appeal's furthei' that the agent took the sticks in his hand and threw them 
away and dirccled the interpreter to tell the Indians that there were too many 
of tluMii and that they ought or must move over the Mississi])i)i. 

Being thus repulsed, or turned off. it appears that many of these Indians 
aI)andoned their claims and have gone west, while some of them yet remain 
and now assert their claims under the foregoing signification of their intention 
to remain. 

The investigation had in 1837 was nnder an act of Congress ap- 
pointing three commissioners to tal^e additional testimony respecting 
the conduct of Col. Ward toward the Indians who desired to remain 
in Mississippi nnder article 11. The commissioners, under date of 
Jtilv 31, 1838, in their report stated as follows: 

From the great mass of proof offere<l to the board, there can be no doubt of 
the entire unfitness of the agent for the station. His conduct on many occa- 
sions was marked by a degree of hostility to the claims calculated to deter the 
claimants from mriking application to him. His manner to the Indians coming 
before him for registration was often arbitrary, tyraimical, and insulting, an<l 
evidently ir.tended to drive them west of the Mississippi against their will and 
in violation of the letter and spirit of the treaty. 

From these causes it has become difficult, at this late day, to make clear 
proof in all cases of the applications to him to be registered. The l)Ook in which 
the names of a great number of Indians was registered by him, it is clear, has 
never been returned to the Government. The board have therefore thought it 
their duty to be satisfied with lighter testimony than under other circumstances 
they might have deemed themselves bound to require. They have received in 
evidence of their intention to remain in the country and take lands under the 
treaty evidence either symbolical, by proxy, as well as by direct apjilication. 

It is in proof also that the agency house was very remote from the great 
body of the nation, and that it %vas inconvenient to the Indians on that acccmnt 
to make personal application to him at that place, and it is also shown that the 
modes adopted by them to make their intentions known to him were in con- 
formity with their usual habits and manner of transacting business. 

The fact also that these people to the number of not less than 5,000 have 
I'emained in the country to this time notwithstanding the efforts of the remov- 
ing agent of the United States, who has been constantly with them, to induce 
them to emigrate west of the Mississippi. Their known attachment to their 
homes, the councils held by them on the subject, and their constant declara- 
tions of their intention to remain and take the benefit of the treaty have not 
been without their infiuence in bringing the board to the conclusion that it 
was the almost universal intention of these Indians now remaining east of 
the Mississippi to take the benefit of the fourteenth article of the treaty. 

Again, the Commissioner of Indian Atl'aii-s. having before him the 
reports of agents and investigating committees respecting the con- 
duct of Col. Ward, officially reported as follows : 

The agent of the Government. Col. Ward, unfortunately so managed this 
business that it is left almost entirely to oral testimony to prove the names of 
those who ajiitlied for registration within the six months and the signification 
of llieir intention to remain and become citizens of the States. That he kept 
a book about foolscap size containing two or three quires of paper and which 
was almost filled with the names of persons registered is proved, and it is also 
proved that this book was afterwards partially torn up and used as shaving 
paper, was left out in the weather, and finally was sent to one of the Folsoms, 
after which nothing more was heard of it. It is also proved that many applied 
personally to Ward to be registered who were refused on the gi'onnd that he 
had received orders from the department not to register any more; that councils 



REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. R. 19213. 13 

of the Ijidlans were held at which it was deteniiineil by those present that they 
would remain and take lands under the fourteenth article: that lists were made 
out at some of these councils of the persons present which were presented to 
Ward by delegates selected for that purpose; that he registered a part of one 
of the lists and refused to register any more and declined looking at other lists 
altogether ; that at those councils where there was no person present who 
could write, sticks were cut, one representing each head of a family, a shorter 
stick attached to each young man, and notches cut representing the females 
and children ; that delegates were appointed out of each neighborhood to take 
these sticks to the agent and tell him the names of the persons represented by 
them, the members of their families, etc.; and that when the bundle of sticks 
was presented by those delegates he threw them away. 

In all these cases where it is shown that the claimants in any of these ways, 
either in iierson or by delegate, signify or endeavor to signify their intention 
of remaining, the commissioners have deemed it a virtual com])liance with that 
provision of the trenty. and in that opinion of the connnissioners I concni'. 
Many of these applications were made to Ward at the time of the payment of 
an annuity in the summer of 18.S1. at Leflore's, which, upon examination, is 
found to be within six mouths after the ratification of the treaty. 

Col. Ward did enroll 71 heads of families and patents were actu- 
ally issued to 143 heads of families under article 14. In 1838, it 
appears, however, that there wei-e at least o.OOO Chocta^v Indians re- 
maining in Mississippi. Many of them thereafter scattered and 
some are noAv found in Texas, some in Louisiana, some in Avhat is 
now Oklahoma and not enrolled, and a great many still remain in 
Mississippi. It was found by the court in Choctaw Nation v. United 
States (119 IT. S., 1), which finding was adopted from the finding 
made by the Court of Claims in the same case, appeal having been 
taken to the Supreme Court from the award of the Court of Claims, 
that 1,34(5 Choctaw heads of families attempted to comply with the 
provisions of the treaty. Of course, it must be borne in mind that 
if 1.34(5 heads of families attempted to come under article 14, they 
would represent probabh^ three or four times their number, as each 
head of a family represented the other members of his family, 
children and adults. Complaint was repeafedly made to the Gov- 
ernment on account of the injuries done Choctaws by the conduct 
of Col. Ward. Many attempts were made to get at something like a 
settlement of these claims. 

In 1842 the Government decided to adjust these difficulties by issuing 
scrip in lieu of the land. It must be borne in mind that by this time 
the (iovernment had sold or parted with the major portion of the 
hmd ceded by the Mississippi Indians by the treaty of 1830. Not 
having these lands to give to the defrauded Indians, it decided to 
give them scrip — not, probably, scrip for as much land as they were 
entitk'd to under article 14, but scrip that wouhl give each head of 
:i family about (lOO acres. They therefore issued scrip and, unckn- 
the law. one half of it Avas to be given the Indians at cmce and tlie 
i-emaining half when tliey removed and settled upon their land. This 
scrip was locatable upon the public domain in the Southwest — of 
course, it was designed to get them west of the Mississippi Iviver. 
The records are silent about how many of the Indians availed them- 
selves of this .scrip and actually located upon the land; but from 
such information as is obtainable — or, rather, tiie lack of infoi-ma- 
tion — one can not resist the conclusion that in-actically none of them 
ever used the scrip. It was probably traded oil' or lost or something 
of that kind. 



14 REPORT AXD STATEMEXT ON H. R, li)2ia. 

Again, in 185-2, Congress decided in lieu of the scrip not yet de- 
livered to fund the amount and pay it to the Indian. It Avas there- 
fore funded at $1.25 an acre and amounted to the sum of $872,000. 
The query at once is. How was this $872,000 paid, and, especially, did 
the defrauded Mississippi ChoctaAvs — and by Mississippi Choctaws 
we mean those who elected to take advantage of article 14 of the 
treaty of 1830 — get a part or their proper part of this aw^ard? 

I will go right ahead and complete this as briefly as I can, and 
then you Avill have the thing before you. 

^Ir, Btrke. As I understand, this only involves the question as 
to who will have enrollment among the Choctaws, and does not touch 
the people in Oklahoma who are clamoring to get on the roll. I w^as 
asking a question. 

The Chairman. This matter is only tentative as I understand it, 
and permits the Secretary of the Interior to report to the next Con- 
gress as to what should be done. 

Mr. Ferris. I want to ask merely one question Avith reference to 
his report, not as to the subject matter but as to the form. Did some 
one state here a moment ago that you had reduced your report to 
writing? 

Mr. Miller, Only that Avhich I began before the committee orally 
the other day. 

Mr. Ferris. AVill that be a part of this record? 

Mr. Miller. It can be if it is ordered. 

Mr. Ferris. I am tremendously anxious to have that and go 
through it myself. 

The Chairman. You remember avc had no stenographer present. 
AfterAvards Ave had a stenographer. 

Mr. Ferris. I understand that Avas dictated as far as it goes, and 
this Avill go on the end of that. Will that be turned over to this 
reporter, so that your Avhole statement can be given together? 

The Chairman. Yes; that Avill be done. 

Mr. Miller. At the last hearing of our committee I endeavored to 
develop why the members of the subcommittee thought that large 
numbers of ChoctaAvs who reside in Mississippi Avere defeated of 
their rights by the acts of the official agent of the United States 
Government. Having demonstrated to our satisfaction that there 
Avere a large number of Indians aa-Iio Avere defrauded, then the next 
c(msideration Avas Avhat steps have been taken by the United States 
to compensate them for the injuries sustained, and the natural and 
consequent inquiry, did the steps taken measure and meet the injuries 
that had been created? I just started to call attention to the fact that 
in 1842, after the second investigation on the part of Mr. AVard Avitli 
respect to ascertaining the number of ChoctaAvs Avho desired to avail 
themselves of article 14 of the treaty of 1830, Congress, in order to 
compensate them for the injury Avhich had resulted, decided to give 
the Indians Avho had been injured scrip in lieu of the land Avhich 
could no longer be given to them. By the provisions of the act one 
half of the scrip Avas to be giA'en immediately to the heads of families, 
and the other half to be withheld until such time as these Indians had 
moved and taken their residence on ChoctaAV lands Avest of the Mis- 
sissippi River. They actually did give the first half of the scrip to 
the Indians and their families. 



REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. R. 19213. 15 

Mr. Ferris. How many? 

Mr. Miller. I can only answer that by saying that when they came 
to fund the scrip whicli they did not give them they estimated the 
number at 1.155 heads of families, which represented probably about 
4,000 or 5,000 Indians. You understand 143 heads of families ac- 
tually received patents to lands under article 14 of the treaty, and 
143, added to 1,155. would give the approximate number of heads of 
families Avho desired to avail themselves of the benefits of article 14 
of the treaty. Only 143 actually succeeded. 

A few years after 1842 a desire was manifested to dispose of the 
scrip question, and it became apparent that these Indians were not 
going in large numbers to occupy the land west of the Mississippi, 
and did not go to any complete extent, though quite a large number 
did go, and the Government decided to fund the unpaid one-half of 
the scrip at $1.25 an acre, and appropriated therefor the sum of 
$872,000. This was in 1852. and to my mind the language of the act 
is quite significant and, as it is so, I would be glad to read it to the 
committee. 

By a previous arrangement between the Indians and the Government 
it was provided there should be paid annually interest on the amount 
of scrip that bad not been actually handed to the Indians. This was 
an arrangement by which the Indians were to get some benefit from 
the unpaid part of the scrip. They paid that in 1852, but decreed 
thereafter that they would not pay it but discharge the whole obli- 
gation by a lump sum. The language of the act is as follows: 

r'ov interest on the nnionnts awtii'ded f'liiH-tnw claimants nnder tlie fonrteentli 
article of tlie treaty of Dancini; l{;il»l(it Creek of tlie 27t]i of t-^epteniber. 1830. 
for lands on which tliey reside. I)nt which it is impossible to give tliem, and in 
lien of tlie scrip that lias been awarded nnder the act of the 23d of Augnst. 
1S42. not deliverable east by the third section of said law, iier act of the 3d 
of March. 184".. for the half ye.ir ending the 30th of ,Tnne, 1852. $21,800: Pio- 
ridctl. That after the 30th day of .Tnne, 1852, all payments of interest on said 
aw.'rds shall cease, and that the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, 
directed to pay said claimants the anionnt of princijial iiwarded in each ease, re- 
spectively, and that the amonnt necessir.v for this purjiose be. and the same is 
l;erel),v, ajjpropriated, not exceeding .$872,000: Prorltlcd further. That the final 
payment and satisfaction of said awards shall be first ratified and ai)])roved as 
tlM> final awards of all claims of snch i)arties nnder the fonrteentli article of 
Slid ti'eaty by the proi)er national anthority of the t'hoctaws in such form as 
?hall be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. 

Now,thewords,"If they receive the $872,000 thereby appropriated a 
release in full of all claims, individual or national, shall be given to 
the United States Government,'' are of the utmost importance. That 
was in 1852. I will say that this $872,000 was paid to the Indians, 
as neai' as I can make out ; at least the C^ourt of CMaiuis, when the case 
was before them, so found. 

The Chairman. Was that recuiii-ed to be ])aid per cai)ita or to 
them as a band? 

Mr. Miller. That was an in(|uiry that I si)ent a gi-eat deal of time 
on. and not until i-ecently could I I'cach a decision: I lunc made out 
that it was j)aid per capita. 

Mr. Carter. AVas that paid to the Choctaws in Okdahouia or the 
Choctaws in Mississippi, or any division of it? 

Mr. Miller. Paid to all of theui. 

Mr. Carter. All together ( 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 



16 REPORT AXD STATEMENT OX H. R. 19213. 

Mr. Carter. Was it paid per capita ? You .say your belief is that 
they were paid per capita. 

Mr. MiLLKR. I will read Avhat the Court of Claims said. Besides 
everythin<i- indicates that the appropriating act contemplates that it 
be paid per capita. 

The Chairman. AVhat page is that ? 

Mr. Miller. Page 18 of 119 United States Keports. It is as 
follows : 

This scrip, which was funded for the benefit of said Choctaw heads of 
families and tJieir children, under the act of Congress of March .3, 1845, was 
funded by the I'nitei^l States at the rate of .$1.2.~» an acre, amounting to the 
sum of .fSTli.dOO. which sum was paid >o the said heads of families and their 
children, oi- tlieir legal representatives, under the provisions of an act of Con- 
gress ajijiroved .July 21. 1852. 

Mr. Burke. What was involved in that case? 

Mr. Miller. This is the great Choctaw case. 

Mr. Carter. Is that '' Choctaw Nation v. United States " ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. sir. 

The Chairman. Please give the style of the case. 

Mr. jNIiller. The style is " Choctaw Nation v. United States." 
(119 U. S.. p. 18.) 

The Chairman. Proceed, Mr. Miller. 

Mr. jNIiller. And yet the matter was not disposed of. In 1855, 
still being undisposed of. and the Indians claiming that they had not 
l)een properly benefited, a treaty was entered into betAveen the Choc- 
taw Nation and the United States. 

From this point on it must be borne in mind that the Choctaw 
Nation as such was an organized body west of the Mississippi 
Elver. When we started out the main body of Choctaws were in 
Mississippi, but gradually migration has been taking place until 
the main body of the nation is located west of the Mississippi River, 
and all official acts of the nation are performed by the officially 
organized Choctaw Nation west of the Mississippi River. And prob- 
ably it is only fair to state that while the Choctaw Nation west on 
every occasion and at all times manifested entire friendliness to the 
Choctaws east, and often invited them out to the AYest and to share 
the western wealth with them, yet it does not appear that they 
ever considered or took into consultation with them those Choctaws 
in Mississippi. In other words they assumed to act for their own 
benefit largely. 1855 the Choctaw Nation and the United States 
entered into another treaty containing many provisions, but one 
of which is important. 

Mr. BiRKE. I do not want to disturb your argument, but you 
stated a nionient ago that you were going to read something that the 
National Council did and before they heard from the Court of 
Claims. 

Mr. jNIiLiJiR. I am going to come to that later. 
Mr. Burke. All right. " 

Mr. Miller. .In 1^55 the treaty made between the Choctaws and 
the I"^nited States (iovernment agreed that the whole matter should 
be submitted to the United States Senate as a court of arbitration to 
take into consideration all claims, individual and national, that the 
Choctaws had against the United States, they to make a thorough 
investigation and report, which should be final and complete. The 



REPORT AXD STATEMENT OX H. R. 19213. 17 

United States Senate did proceed and did have extended hearings on 
the matter, and in 1851) made a finding. I think we onght to read 
that finding. Perhaps it woukl be wise to pnt into the record the 
provisions of the treaty nnder which this was siibmitted to the United 
States Senate. 

Article 11 of the treaty provides: 

The Govornnieiit of the rnited States not being i)rej):ired to assent to the 
claim set up under tlie treaty of Spjiteniher 27. 1880, and so earnestly contended 
for by the Clioctaws as a rult^ of settleuient. but justly aijpreciatinsr the saeri- 
tiees. faithful services, and .m-neral liood conduct of the Choctaw i>eople, and 
l)eing desirous that their riiihrs and claims r.gainst the United States shall 
receive a jusl. fair, and liberal consideration, it- is thei'efore stipulated that the 
following (piestions be submitted for adjudication to the Senate of the T'nited 
States: 

First. Whether the Choctaws are entitled to or shall be allowed the proceeds 
nt the sale of the lands ceded by them to the T'nited States by the treaty of 
September 27, 18.30. deducting therefrom tlie cost of their survey and sale, and 
:ill just and proper ex]ienditures .and iia.vments imder the provisions of said 
treaty, and. if so, what price per acre shall be allowed to the Choctaws for 
llie lands remaining unsold, in order that a final settlement with them may be 
promi»tly effected; or — 

Second. Whether the Choctaws shall be allowed a gross su.m in further and 
full satisfaction of all their claims, national and individual, aginst the l^nitetl 
State-;; and. if so, how much. 

Art. 12. In case the Senate shall award to the Choctaws the net proceeds of 
the lar.ds ceded as aforesaid the same shall be received by them in full satis- 
faction of all their claims against the T'nited States, whether national or indi- 
vidual, arising under any former treaty — 

Now this, gentlemen, is the particular treaty stipulation of im- 
portance — 

and the Choctaws shall thereupon become liable and bound to pay all such, 
individual claims as may be adjudged by the proper authorities of the tribe 
to be equitable and just — the settlement and payment to be made with the 
advice and under the direction of the United States agent for the tribe: and 
so much of the fund awarded by the Senate to the Choctaws, as the proper 
authorities thereof shall ascertain and determine to be necessary for the 
payment of the just liabilities of the tribe, shall, on their requisition, be i)aid 
over to them by the United States. But should the Senate allow a gross sum 
in further and full satisfaction of all their claims, whether national or indi- 
vidual, against the United States, the same shall be accepted by the Choctaws, 
and they shall thereupon become liable for and bound to pay all the individual 
claims as aforesaid, it being expressly understood that the adjudication and 
decision of the Senate shall be final. 

In other words, it is contemplated in this treaty that if the Senate 
awards a linnp sum. after hearing all the evidence, both as to claim.s 
of indi\iduals and the nation, a lump sum shall be awarded to tlie 
Choctiiw Xation. and then the Choctaw Xation as an entity in itself 
shall become liable to the individuals for the individual claims which 
form ])art of the whole. 

Mr. Burke. Was that treaty made with all the Choctaws? 

Mr. MiLLEif. It Avas made with the Choctaw Xation. As I have 
figured it out it consisted of the Choctaws West. The Choctaws in 
Afississippi were never consulted, as far as I can find, or became 
parties to any treaty witli the TTnited States aft^r September 27, 1830. 

The CiiAiH.-vrAX. When was tliat treaty made? 

Mr. MiLLEK. In 1855. 

The Chairman. In the Five Civilized Tribes of Oklahoma? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. sii-: it was in 1855 some time, T can not give the 
e.xact date. 

7r)ir,8— 1.3 2 



18 REPORT AND STATEMEXT ON H. R. 19213. 

As a result of the United States Senate sitting as a court of arbi- 
tration and hearing the matter from beginning to end, on the 9th 
of March, 1855, they made their finding as follows : 

RcHolved, That the Choctaws be allowed the proceeds of the sale of such 
lands as have been sold by the United States on the 1st day of January lasK 
deductius therefrom the costs of their survey and sale and all proper expendi- 
tures and payments under said treaty, excluding the reservations allowed and 
secured, and estlmatinc; the scrip issued in lieu of reservations at the rate of 
$1.25 per acre: and, further, that they be also allowed 12^ cents per acre for 
the residue of said lands. 

That was the decision of the United States Senate. They at the 
same time called upon the Secretary of the Interior to make a state- 
ment of accoimt showing the quantity of land sold, the amount for 
which it had been sold, also showing the amount unsold. 

Mr. Carter. And was this the Senate Avhich you are si)eaking of 
noAV ? 

ilr. Miller. Yes, v-Xv^ I am speaking of the Senate. Xow, for the 
benefit of some who were not here the other morning when Mr. Rus- 
sell and I discussed this, it might be well to state that for the lands 
ceded by the treaty of 1830. consisting^of a little over 10,000.000 acres 
in the State of Mississippi, no specific consideration was stated in 
the treaty itself. 

Mr. Stephens of Nebraska. This is the first price made on the 
land; this Senate act of 185.")? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir, Xow. under the direction of the Senate the 
Secretary of the Interior did state a complete account, and in that it 
was found that adding together all proceeds derived from sales there- 
tofore made, and estimating the amount unsold at 12^ cents an acre, 
the aggregate sum was $8,070,614.80. Now, the}' had a whole lot of 
charges against that for removal, cost of subsistence, cost of selling, 
and other charges, which aggregated $5,097,367.50, leaving a residue 
or balance due to the Choctaws of $2,981,247.30. 

Mr. Burke. Were they charged for the $782,000 that was paid 
them ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir: that comes in just a minute. Now, the Sen- 
ate of the United States at once appropriated $250,000 as the first 
payment on this $2,981,247.30. and I will sav that on that 
$2.98 1,247.30 interest was to l)e i)aid. The act of March 2, 1861, the 
Indian appropriation act, provided for an issue of $250,000 in bonds 
as a part payment on this balance due the ChoctaAvs. At this time 
the war broke out. The ChoctaAvs and other Indians were on differ- 
ent sides, and naturally all interest stopped. All that was paid was 
this sum of $250,000. The bonds were never issued. 

That remained until 1881. when, by act, this was sent to the Court 
of Chxims. By this I mean the entire claims of the Choctaws against 
the' United States, and it was fought out there, and the Court of 
Claims came to this decision, that inasmuch as the Choctaw Nation 
and the Choctaw individuals received and accepted $872,000 under 
the terms of the appropriation act of 1852, and executed therefor a 
release in full to the United States, they could not adjudicate or 
award any claim in damages to the ChoctaAvs by reason of the items 
that were included in the $872,000: that is, growing out of the lands. 
(Choctaw Nation v. United States. No. 12742. Court of Claims. 



REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. R. 19213. 19 

"When appealed to Supreme Court it became Choctaw Nation v. U. S., 
119 U. S., 1.) 

Now it will be appropriate to see the exact nature of the Choc- 
taw national act. 

yiv. Stephens of Nebraska. In other words, the Court of Claims 
repudiated the action of the Senate? 

]Mr. Miller. I have not come to that yet. I will in a moment. 

The Choctaw^ Nation, by its proper authorities, on November G. 
1852. executed and delivered to the United States the following in- 
strument — under the provisions of the act to wdiich I called attention 
and cjuoted from, the act of July 21, 1852 — for the purposes therein 
specified : 

Whereas by jin act of Congress entitled "An act to supply deficiencies in the 
ii])ini)iiriations for the service of the fiscal year ending the 30th day of June, 
is."(2."" all payments of interest on the amount awarded Choctaw claimants 
under the fourteenth article of the tre.ity of Dancing IJahljit Creek for lands 
on which they resided, hut which it is impossible to give them, shall cease, and 
that the Secretary of the Intericu' be directed to pay said claimants the amount 
of the principal awards in each case, respectively, and that an amount neces- 
sary for this inirjiose be appropriate<l, not exceeding the sum of $872,000; and 
that final payment and satisfaction of said awards shall be first ratified and 
ai)prov«l as a final release of all claims of such parties under the fourteenth 
article of said treaty by the proper national authority of the Choctaws in such 
form as shall be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior: Now be it known 
that the said general council of the Choctaw Nation do hereby ratify and 
ajtprove the final payment and satisfaction of said awards, agreeably to the 
provisions of the act aforesaid, as a final release of the claims of such parties 
under the fourteenth article of said treaty. 

It is fair to state that the Senate of the United States thought that 
in equity and justice to the Indians that should not be a bar. In 
other words, they rescinded that '' satisfaction and release." 

y.lr. Bi'RKE. This treaty that authorized that arbitration was rati- 
fied, was it not? 

^Ir. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Burke. Then that became a la'w? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir; but that has not been carried out yet.' We 
have shown that the treaty of 1855 provided that wdiatever award 
was provided or received or given to the Choctaw Nation, if it was 
a lump smn, then the Choctaw Nation should be responsible to the 
individuals whose claims were included, but they never got that 
award under the treaty of 1855. 

Mr. Burke. But you misunderstand my point. They did, by 
the action of their council, accept and receive the sum of $872,000. 
which was to be in full of all claims or demands that they might have 
against the United States. Now, subsequently the tribe entered into 
a compact with the United States by wdiich it was agreed to arbi- 
trate the matter in the Senate, notwithstanding this final settlement. 
Then that became the law wIkmi that treaty was made? 

Mr. Miller. Yes: I understand what you mean now. If you will 
just let me finish I am sure that I can get through with my part 
shortly, and I am sure that I will have answered many of these nat- 
ural inquiries. 

The ca.se was appealed to the United States Supreme Court, and 
finally decided. The United States Supreme Coin-t held, among 
f)tlier things, that the award of the Senate in 1859 was ])robably the 
mo.st satisfactory, the most equitable, and the most just award that 



20 REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. E. 19213. 

could be made, having regard to the elapse of time and the other 
difficulties of securing exact information. 

They held that the Court of Claims was wrong in holding the 
award in 1852 as an estoppel; that it was not an estoppel against 
them for the reasons which they set forth at length, wherein they 
discussed what should be the attitude of a strong nation toward a 
weak one in making and executing contractual arrangements. The 
language of the court is as follows: 

As wiis said by this court recently in the case of the United States r. Kagauia 
(118 U. S.. ini. 375. 383) : "These Indian tribes are the wards of the Nation; 
they are communities dependent on the United States; dependent hirgely for 
their daily food; dependent for their political ri^'hts. They owe no allegiance 
to the States and receive from them no protection. Because of the local ill 
feeling the people of the States where they are found are often their deadliest 
enemies. From their very weakness and helplessness, so largely due to the 
course of dealing of the Federal Government with them, and the treaties in 
which it has been promised, there arises the duty of protection, and with it the 
power. This has always been recognized by the Executive and by Congress 
and by this court whenever the question has arisen." 

It had accordingly been said in the case of Worcester r. Georgia (0 Pet., 
pp. 515, 582) : "The language used in treaties with the Indians should never 
be construed to their prejudice. If words be made use of which are susceptible 
of a more extended meaning than their plain import, as connected with the 
tenor of the treaty, they should be considered as used only in the latter 
sense. * * * How the words of the treaty were understood by this unlet- 
tered people, rather than their critical meaning, should form the rule of con- 
struction." 

The recognized relation between the parties to tliis controversy, therefore, is 
that between a superior and an inferior, wliereby the latter is placed under the 
care and control of the former, and whicli, while it authorizes the adoption on 
the part of the United States of such policj' as their own public interests may 
dictate, recognizes, on the other hand, such an interpretation of their acts and 
promises as justice and reason demand in all cases where power is exerted by 
the strong over those to whom they owe care and protection. The parties are 
not on an equal footing, and that inequality is to be made good by the superior 
justice which looks only to the substance of the right without regard to techni- 
cal rules framed under a system of municipal jurisprudence formulating the 
rights and obligations of private persons equally subject to tlie same laws. 

The rules to be applied in the i>resent case are those which govern public 
treaties, which, even in case of controversies between nations equally inde- 
liendent. are not to be read as rigidly as documents between private persons 
governed by a system of technical law. but in the light of that larger reason 
which constitutes the spirit of the law of nations. And it is the treaties made 
lietween the United States and the Choctaw Nation, holding such a relation, the 
assumptions of fact and of right which they presuppose, the acts and conduct 
of the parties under them, which constitute the material for settling the c<mtro- 
versies which have arisen under them. The rule of interpretation already 
stated, as arising out of the nature and relation of the parties, is sanctioned 
and ado])ted by the express terms of the treaties themselves. In the eleventh 
.•irticle of the treaty of 18.55 the Government of the United States exjiresses 
itself as being desirous that the rights and claims of the Choctaw people against 
the T'nited States "shall receive a just. fair, and liberal consideration." 

And the United States Supreme Com-t cut the matter short by 
making identically the same award in 1889 that the Senate had 
nuide just 30 years before. Now, it must be. I think, entirely ai-'reed 
that the treaty of 1855 was the foundation for this ultimate award. 

I have asked for the exact amount that was paid, but the Interior 
Department has not yet given it to me. Auvhow it was $2.i)81.-J47.30 
plus some interest. It must be agreed that the basis for that was 
the treaty of 1855, and on account of the changed conditions of 
things that occurred during the next 30 years Ave must look back 
to that as the origin. So tliat. in passing on the pavment of this 



KEPOET AND STATEMENT ON H. B. 19213. 21 

larger sum, we must have regard to article 1'2 of the treaty of 1855. 
In "other words, the United States paid this money to the Choctaw 
Nation (West), and no one has yet been able to find that any Choctaw 
Indians (East) or Mississippi Choctawg ever got any of it. To my 
mind that is of the utmost importance in this case. If the Choctaw 
Indians agreed solemnly by the treaty of 1855 that if a lump sum 
were awarded they Avould become responsil)le to the individuals on 
account of claims', and they received that lump sum, both in law. 
equity, and justice there still remains to be adjudicated between the 
Choctaw Nation and the Avronged individuals the rights of the 
wronged individuals. Now, that may seem a trifle harsh to the Choc- 
taw Nation (West), but I hope it will not, because they have mani- 
fested from every standpoint the most friendly attitude, and it 
might be well, perhaps, to call the attention of the committee to a 
few things that I discovered that exhibit that attitude. For in- 
stance, at the close of the war in 1800. when the United States en- 
tered into a treaty to restore to them their rights, very generously 
and properlv this provision was inserted — to wit. article 45 of the 
treaty of July 10, 18G6 : 

All the rights, privileges, aiul iinniniiities hevetofore possessed l>.v snid n.-ition 
or individunls thereof or to which the.v were entitled nnder the treaties and 
legislation heretofore made and had in connection with it shall be and are 
liereby declared to be in full force, so far as they are consistent with the provi- 
sions of this treaty, to the end that such Choctaws and (''hick;'saws as yet 
remain outside of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nation may arbitrarily remain 
and exercise rights heretofore given to the Choctaws and Chickasaws, ])ro 
vided that before any such absent Choctaw or Chickasaw shall be permitted to 
select for him or herself or others as hereinafter provided, he or she shall 
satisfy the register of the land ofiice of his or her intentions or the intentio)i 
of the party for whom the selection is to be made, to become bona tide residents 
of the said nation within five .vears of the time of selection, and should said 
absenlee fail to remove into the said nation and occup.v and connnence an im- 
lirovement of the land selected within the time aforesaid, the said selection 
shall be canceled and the land hereafter be discharged from all accounts 
thereof. 

That simply looks to the removal of those. Here is another por- 
tion of that same treaty, where it provides that a certain notice re- 
quired in one article " shall be governed not only in the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations (as notice to the Choctaws that they can go and 
take their lands and get their rights), but by publication in news- 
papers printed in the States of Mississippi, Tennessee, Louisiana. 
Texas, Arkansas, and Alabama, to the end that such Choctaws and 
Chickasaws as yet remain outside of the Choctaw and chickasaw 
Nations may be informed and have oj^portunity to exercise the rights 
hereby given to representative Choctaws and Chickasaws." Then 
follows that portion which I have just read. 

Again, in 1880, the Choctaw Nation, by its regular legislative 
body, sent this to the United States Congress. It was never trans- 
mitted to or reached the Mississij^pi Choctaws. but it shows the proper 
attitude on the part of the Choctaw Nation. It is as follows: 

Whereas there are large numbers of Choctaws yet in the S ales of Mississi])pi 

and Louisiana who are entitled to all the rights and iirivilcges of citizenship 

in the Choctaw Nation ; and 
Whereas llie.v are denied all rights of citizenship in said Stales; and 
Whei'eas they are invited to migi-ate themselves into the Choctaw Nation: 

Therefoie be it 

Rrsiilvctl by (Iciicrdl (Joiiiiril of tlir CJiochiir Xnlion (isnciiihlcd. That the 
IJnite<l States Government is hereby requested to make provision for the migra- 



22 REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. R. 19213. 

tion of said Clioftiiws from Iho said States to the Choc-'aw Xatioi . The 
national se<Tetar.v is herel).v instructed to furnish a certified copy of tliis 
memorial each lo the S])ealver of the House of Itepresenratives of the United 
States, I'resident of the Senate of the United States, and Conunissioner of 
Indian Affairs, with the request that they do all Ihey can to secure the acconi- 
plishnient of the object of this memorial, and this resolution shall t.-ike effe.-t 
juid he enforced from and after its passage. 

B. F. vSmallwood. 
PritwiiJCil Cliicf, CJioctatr \<ili(ni. 

Then Avo come to the enrolling- of the Clioctaws and other Indians 
in Oklahoma, looking to the allotment of their lands and opening up 
of the surplus lands to white settlers. 

The Dawes Commission went to Oklahoma in the early nineties, 
and in 18.96 they started to make the roll, and without any specific 
request to do so they seemed to feel that it was a part of their duty 
to look after the Mississippi Choctaws. They made a report on Jan- 
uary 28. 1898, which is the first report they made covering the Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws. In that they said : 

It follows, therefore, from this reasoning, as well as from the historical review 
already recited, and the nature of the title itself, as well as all stipulations con- 
cerning it in the treaMes between the United States and the Choctaw Nation, 
that to avail himself of the " privileges of a Choctaw citizen " any person 
claiming to be a descendant of those Choctaws who were provided for in the 
fourteenth article of the treaty of 1S30 must tirst show the fact that he is 
such descendant, and has in good faith joined his brethren in the Territory, 
with the intent to become one of the citizens of the nation. Having done so, 
such iiersou has a right to be enrolled as a Choctaw citizen and to claim all the 
privileges of such a citizen, except to a share in the annuities. And that other- 
wise he can not claim as a right the " privilege of a Choctaw citizen." 

To the claim, as thus defined, the Choctaw Nation has always acceded, and 
has manifested in many ways its willingness to take into its citizenship any 
one or all of the Mississippi Choctaws who would leave their residence and 
citizenshi]! in that State and join in good faith their brethren in the Territory, 
with iiarticipation in all the privileges of such citizenship, save only a .share in 
their annuities, for which an equivalent has been given in the grant of land and 
citizenship in Mississippi. 

That lays down the rule which they should follow in enrolling 
Choctaw citizens, namely, only those who receive benefits under 
article 14 of the treaty of 1830 and who had removed. 

The Chairman. What is the date of the act ? 

Mr. Miller. This was a report of the Dawes Commission. Jan- 
nary 28. 1898. _ . 

FolloAving this elaborate report, which covered a great many nuit- 
ters in comiection with the Five Civilized Tril)es. the Curtis Act was 
Fi-amed and ]:)assed June 28, 1898. Ths contained two sections relat- 
ing to the Mississippi Choctaws. They are as follows: 

No person shall be enrolled who has not heretofore removed to and in good 
faith settled in the nation in which he claims citizenship. That relates to .-ill 
Indians of all tribes: Provided, hoincrcr. Tliat nothing contained in this act 
shall be so construed as to militate against any right or privileges which 
Mis.sissippi Choctaws may have under the laws or treatres of the United States. 

In other words, there is a specific reservation in favor of the Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws so far as the necessity of removal and settlement is 
concerned. 

Mr. AVarburton. Does that refer also to the Choctaws in Louis- 
iana i There are thousands of Choctaws there. 

^fi'. Miller. Yes, sir: it referred to those in Mississippi and Louis- 
iana alike. 



REPORT AND STATEMENT OX H. R. 19213. 23' 

The next section reads as follows : 

Said comuiissiou shall have authority to (leteniiine the identity of Choct.tw 
Indians claiminf: rights in the Clioetaw lands under article 34 of the treaty 
between tlie United States and tlie Choctaw Nation, concluded September 27, 
1S30, !iud to that end they may adnunister oaths, examine witnesses, and iier- 
form all other acts necessary thereto and make repoi-t to the Secretary of the 
I nterior. 

There is the specific instruction to the Dawes Commission to pro- 
ceed to enroll Mississippi Choctaws. As a result thereof they sent 
one of their members by the name of McKinnon into the territory 
east of the Mississippi, wherein reside these ChoctaAvs. In the fol- 
lowing 3^ear. 1899, Mr. McKinnon made his report, accompanied by 
rolls containing the names of 1.922 Choctaws whom he had identified 
as Indians who were descendants of those who had received or were 
entitled to receive benefits under the provisions of article 14 of tlie 
treaty of 1830. 

Mr. Burke. Mr. McKinnon was of the commission, w^as not he? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Ferris. He is in toAvn here now. 

Mr. Miller. It might be only fair to say that the Dawes Commis- 
sion, in determining these cases, except when otherwise specifically 
directed by act of Congi-ess. has held that any Choctaw was entitled 
to the fidl rights of Choctaw citizenship who was a descendant of 
one who secured a patent of land under article 14, or who had an 
ancestor Avho had that right and was defrauded out of it by the 
action of Col. Ward. 

Mr. Carter. That left out the question of residence? 

Mr. Miller. I am not speaking of residence now; I am speaking 
of identity. Now, it will be noticed that under the Curtis Act there 
is no authority to enroll. The authority is to identify. So Mr. Mc- 
Kinnon's roll identified 1.922 Indians as being identified as Choc- 
taws and entitled to citizenship, but without any authority to enroll 
and. of course, did not. 

Mr. KoNOP. They never were enrolled, these 1,922? 

Mr. Miller. Some of them were. 

Mr. Burke. If these 1,922 had moved over into the Choctaw Na- 
tion (West) within a certain time, they might have been enrolled, 
might not they? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir; probably would have been. A gi'eat many 
of them Avere, because they did rejnoAe ^ome time after that. 

Mr. Ferris. Is not it true that a great many of them did? Did not 
that investigation disclose that a great many of them did and Avere 
enrolled ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Did you find out hoAv many? 

Mr. Miller. I can find how many. They enrolled altogether 1,445 
Missi.ssip))i ChoctaAvs. In addition thereto, 198 neAV borns Avere 
cni'oUed under the act of March 3. 1905. and April 26, 1906, provid- 
ing for cinolliiient of ncAv borns. A part of these enrolled are also 
on the McKinnon roll. I have here the McKinnon roll, and by check- 
ing it can be ascertained how many were actually enrolled as Choc- 

taAA'S. 

The CiiAiHAiAX. There Avas an appi-opriation made of $20,000 by 
one of those acts for purpose of enabling the Mississippi Choctaws 
to cross the Mississippi River from Mississippi to Oklahoma? 



24 REPORT AND STATEMENT OX H, R. 19213. 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir ; 207 were removed before the}' exhausted the 
appropriation. The act of May 31. 1900. with further reference to 
this matter, states as follows: 

Thill siiid coimuission shall continue to exerc-ise all auiliorily heretofore con- 
ferred on it by law. But it shall not receive, consider, or nialve any record of 
any application of any person for enrollment as a nienil>er of any tribe in 
Indian Territory who has not been a recofrnized citizen thereof and duly enrolled 
oi- jidniitted as such, and its refusal of such applications shall be final when 
approved by the Secretary of tlie Intei'ior : I'roriilcil. That any Mississipiii 
Chcctaw duly idenlitied as such by the United States Connnissiou to the Five 
Civilized Tribes shall have the right at any time prior to the apiiroval of the 
final rolls of the Choctaws and the Chickasaws by the Secretary of the Interior 
to make settlement within the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, and on proof of the 
fact of bona tide settlement may be enrolled i)y the said United States connuis- 
.sidu and by the Secretary of tlie Interior as Choctaws entitled to allotment : 
rrorUJed fiifthcr. That all contracts or agreements looking to the sale or incum- 
brance in any way of tlie lands to be allotted to said Mississiiipi Choctaws shall 
be null and void. 

I call s])ecial attention to those acts as they show that the neces- 
sity of removal into this new country west was essential to enroll- 
ment or being recognized as entitled to the benefits of Choctaw citi- 
zenship, 

Mr. SiMTTir. Before you get away from that point, have you the 
figures showing the number of applications to the DaAves Commis- 
sion for identification by the United States, showing how many they 
refused to identify as Mississippi Choctaws? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir; T can give those exact figures. The report 
of the Commissioner to the Five Civilized Tribes in 1907, which was 
after the rolls were closed, shows that 24,634 persons applied to the 
Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes for identification. Of these 
2,534 were identified and their names were placed upon schedules 
and forwarded to the Secretary of the Interior. As above stated. 
1,44.5 only were really enrolled. 

Mr. Stephens of Nebraska. There Avere 24.G34 that applied? 

Mr. Miller. Yes. sir. Then we come to the last act of Congress 
that has any importance and particular bearing upon this matter. 
That is the act of 1902. which some of the connnittee have become 
very familiar with. That is what some call the McMurray Act. 
Article 41 provides as follows: 

All persons duly identified by the Coiiuuission (n the IMve Civilized Tribes 
undtn- the provisions of section 21 of the act of Congress ai)])roved ,Iune 2Si. 
1S!»S (80 Stat.. 40,5), as Mississippi Choctaws entitled to benefits under article 
34 of the treaty between the United States and the Choctaw Nation conclude! 
September 27, IsriO. may. at any time within six months after tlie date of their 
identification as Mississijiiti Choctaws by the said commission, make bona fide 
settlement within the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, and upon proof of such 
settlement to such commission within one year after the date of the said 
identification as Mississippi Choctaws shall be eurolletl by such commission 
as J*Iississippi Choctaws entitled to allotment as her(>in i)rovided for citizens of 
the tribes, subject to special provisions lierein provided, as to Mississippi 
Choctaws. and said enrollment shall be final wlien approved by the Secretary 
of the Interior. 

In other words, that provision says that to become enrolled they 
would have to remove, and they were given six months in which to 
do it after the date of their identification. 

Then it goes on in this most remarkable language: 

The application of no person for identification as a ^iississiiipi Choctaw 
shall be received by said commission after' six months subsequent to the date 



EEPOET AND STATEMENT ON H. R. 19213. 25 

of the final ratification of this agreement and in the disposition of such 
application all fnll-hlood Mississippi Choctaw In<lians, and the descenedants 
of any Mississippi Clioctaw Indians, wliether of full hlood or mixed blood, who 
received a patent to land under the said fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830, 
who had not moved to and made bona fide settlement in the Choctaw-Chicka- 
saw country prior to June 28, 1898, shall be deemed to be Mississippi Choctaws 
entitled to benefits under article 14 of the said treaty of September 27. 
383(1, and to identification as such by said commission, but this direction of 
]irovision shall be deemed to be only a rule of evidence and shall not be 
invoked by or operate to the advantage of any ai)plicant who is not a Mis- 
sissi[)pi Choctaw of the full blood, or who is not the descendant of a Mis- 
sissippi Chactaw who received a patent to land under said treaty, or who is 
otherwise barred from the rights of citizenship in the Choctaw Nation. All 
of said Mississippi Choctaws so enrolled Iiy said commission shall be upon a 
separate roll. 

The more often one reads that the greater wonder grows in his 
mind as to exactly what was intended. I read it, I think. 20 times 
before I could get it into my head exactly what I thought it meant. 

Mr. Ferris. Give us your interpretation of it. 

Mr. Miller. Well, to speak somewhat frankly. I think if a man 
stood on his head and looked cross-eyed at it he could get it first 
lick. To boil it down it means this: It means that any full-blood 
Choctaw, who can prove that he is a full-blood Choctaw, by that 
proof establishes his identity ; that is, it is not necessary that he go 
back to trace his ancestry. It is not necessary that he show that he 
ever had an ancestor who was entitled to share in the benefits of 
article 14 of the treaty of 1830. 

Mr. Ferris. You mean that he proved that without going back into 
his ancestry? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. Now, it may be pertinent to inquire how an 
Indian can prove he is a full blood without going back to his ancestry. 
But he would not have to trace his ancestry back to 1830. That is 
the first class. In the second class it provides that all mixed bloods 
who can prove that they are descendants from an ancestor who re- 
ceived, or were entitled to receive, patents under article 11 of the 
treaty of 1830, are entitled to identification as Mississippi Choctaws. 
In other words, the burden of proof of ancestry back to 1830 is put 
upcm the mixed bloods and not upon the full bloods. It is only fair 
to say that in vicAv of what has just been stated that it is not an en- 
tirely difficult matter to detect a full blood. One who is seven-eighths 
or a full blood looks very much different from one who is three- 
fourths, and by simply looking at the applicants they could come 
pretty close in determining a great many cases, l)ut so far as I can 
make out. no Indian was ever enrolled under this section. 

Now. that looks like a good piece of sweet, fresh meat. It looks 
like doing something for the benefit of those Indians, but it required 
that they make application within six months and remove to the In- 
dian country. You might just as well tell me that I could have an 
allotment in the moon if I would go to it as to tell a great many of 
those Indians that they could have an allotment and benefit of citi- 
zenship in some land out in the West. In other words, it did not 
take into consideration, if it was designed to aid those Indians, their 
poverty, their ignorance, their superstition, and all the other elements 
that these Indians possess, and so it is not surjirising that no Indians 
evei- enrolled under this section so far as I can find. 



26 REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. E. 19213. 

Further provisions of the treaty of 1902, regarding Mississippi 
I'hoctaAvs. are as follows: 

42. When any such Mississipi)! Choctaw shall have in jiood faith continuously 
vesirtetl upon the land>4 of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations for a period of 
rbree years, inclu<ling his residence thereon before and after such enrollment, he 
shall, niton due proof of such continuous, bona fide residence, made in such 
manner and before such officer as may be desij;nated by tlie Secretary of the 
Interior, receive a i»atent for his allotment, as provided in the Atoka agreement, 
and he s^hall hold the lands allotted to him as provided in this agreement for 
(-■itizens of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. 

43. Applications for enrollment as Mississippi Choctaws and applications to 
have land set apart to them as sucli must be made persionally before the Com- 
mission to tlie Five Civilized Tribes. Fathers may apply for their minor 
i-hildren : and if the father be dead, the motlier may apply: husbands may ap- 
ply for wives. Applications for orphans, insane persons', and persons of un- 
sound mind may be made by duly ai»pointed guardian or curator, and for aged 
and infirm persons and prisoners by agents duly authorized thereunto by power 
<if attorney, in the discretion of said commission. 

44. If within four years after sucli enrollment any such Mississippi Choctaw, 
<ir his heirs or representatives if he be dead, fails to make proof of such con- 
tinuous bona fide residence for the period so prescribed, or up to tlie time of tlie 
death of such Mississippi Choctaw, in case of his deatli after enrollment, he, 
and his heirs and representatives if he be dead, shall be deemed to have acquired 
no interest in tlie lands set apart to liim, and tlie same shall be sold at public 
auction for cash, under rules and regulations prescribed by the Secretary of 
tlie Interior, and the proceeds paid into the Treasury of the United States to 
the credit of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes and distributed per capita with 
other funds of the tribes. Such lands shall not be sold for less than their ap- 
praised value. Upon payment of the full purchase price patent shall issue to 
the purchaser. 

Mr. Smith. A great many made application? 

Mr. Miller. A great many made a])plication — enormous numbers 
of them — bnt I can not find that any of them were ever enrolled. 

Mr. Carter. I just wanted to a.sk if Mr. Miller thought some invi- 
tation had not been held open to the Mississippi Choctaws, as far, 
Mr. Miller, as your investigation goes? 

Mr. Miller. Yes; there is no question about it. I will say the 
Choctaw people west have acted in the most friendly and fraternal 
way. 

Mr. Carter. Now, then, Avas this six months' provision put in there 
so that there might be a time when the thing should end and the 
division of the property could become final? Don't you think that 
was the intention of the McMurray Act? 

^Ir. Miller. I will say that that probably was the intent that ap- 
])eared to this committee, in 1902, when it passed upon the provision 
favorably, but I wall say further, if the committee had investigated 
the situation carefully it would have been convinced that to benefit 
the people it aimed to benefit it must have made an appropriation 
to take them where they had to go; but that appropriation was never 
made. 

Mr. liissKLL. Don't you understand that the act he is referring to 
there intended to cut out everybody who had not actually received a 
patent, or maybe their descendants? 

Mr. Miller. I think probably that Avas the intent of McMurray 
and the tribe. 

In this connection it is proper to say that quite a number of Indians 
were identified under this section as Mississippi Choctaw^s, but the 
identifications came too late for them to remove or to set the benefit 



REPORT AND STATEMENT OX H, R. 19213. 27 

of enrollment. There are 10 families. I think about 50 persons, in- 
volved. Of course their rights remain as they were when identified; 
they were and are entitled to enrollment, but not enrolled. 

Now, to sunnnarize on this matter of enrolhnent. Of course the 
Dawes Commission was discontinued in lOOT as to enrollment uiat- 
ters. There were something- like over iJ-l.OOO. all told, who made ap- 
plication and desired to submit proofs. Of that 24.000. "2,534 were 
identified in one way or another as entitled to the rights of Choctaw 
citizenship. Of that number 1,445 were actually enrolled, leaving 
about 1,100 Avho have been identified as entitled to the rights of 
Choctaw citizenship, but have never be^n enrolled, and for that reason 
have never received those benefits. 

Mr. Burke. And did not remove? 

Mr. Miller. Not all of them removed. Most of them did not. A 
few did. 

JMr. KoNOP. None of them removed ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes; some of these 1,100 actually removed, and some 
when removed were ejected by officers of the Choctaws and Chicka- 
saws because they were " interlopers." kSouic remained in the new 
country but were never enrolled. Others drifted away. I think Mr. 
Carter knows there are some Choctaws in Oklahoma belonging to 
this 1,100. 

Mr. Cari'er. I think thei'e is a great deal in this six months" propo- 
sition just stated. For instance, they proposed that a man should be 
identified in six months, gave him six months to be identified in, 
and then required his residence within six months? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Now, then, a man might very easily be identified at 
the end of six months and still not be able to go to Oklahoma. 

Mr. Miller. Yes ; exactly so : and I will say that by legal opinions 
here in the Department of Justice, which we have not gone into at 
all, by conflicting opinions from the Attorney General's office, some 
of these Indians were on and then they were off. The committee is 
familiar with the case of the Nichols family. 

Now. to conclude, the question that we of the subcommittee were 
ourselves obliged to agree on, and did easily agree on, was that by 
the acts of the agent of the United States, Col. "Ward, a serious injury 
and })r()i)erty damage was inflicted upon a large number of Choctaws 
who reuuiined in Mississippi. They have never surrendered any 
claim, so far as T can disclose, that they had by reason of that in- 
justice. They have never been compensated for that injury. They 
have received some benefits, such as would come from the acceptance 
of this scrip and from the enjoyment of the proceeds of the $1.25 
au acre. It is not clear just exactly who got this $1.25 an acre, but 
apparently it was distriluited among these Indians. Of course the 
amount they received was grossly inadequate compared with the 
injury tliat was done. There has been paid to the Choctaw Nation a 
very large sum of money, and in consideration of which the Choctaw 
Nation did l)ecoine liai)le for the indixidual claims of these ]Missis- 
sippi Choctaws. 

These provisions in the last 20 years requii'ing the Mississijjpi 
Choctaws to remove west in order to enjoy benefits were very largely 
just and fair to the Choctaws west, because the Indians ought to 
iiave gone there; thev ought to have been tliere to have been enrolled. 



28 REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. R. 19213. 

to get land, etc., but they had no way of getting there, and I for one 
can not resist the conchision that, as the United States Government 
Avas at fault in not providing some way to take them over, the Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws have been damaged and should be compensated 
from some source. Congress did appropriate, as the chairman has 
suggested, $20,000; but we appropriated $200,000 the other day to 
take care of about 290 Indians. 

Now, what could 4,500 Indians do with $20,000? So it seems to us 
that there are a considerable number of Indians who are entitled to 
benefits of citizenship, yet we recognize that Choctaw citizenship at 
this hour does not mean anything. 

Mr. KoNOP. Have not they any money? 

Mr. Miller. They have plenty of money, but there is no such thing 
as a Choctaw Nation in the old sense of the term. They are citizens 
of the United States just the same as you and I are. 

Mr. KoNOP. They have got money to pay this ? 

Mr. Miller. The Choctaws as a nation have some money and have 
valuable coal lands. But we must recognize a solemn treaty provi- 
sion between the Choctaws and the United States. In the treaty of 
1902, article 35 begins as follows: 

35. No person whose name does not appear upon the rolls prepared as herein 
provided shall be entitled to in any manner participate in the distribution of 
the common property of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes, and those whose 
names appear thereon shall participate in the manner set forth in this agree- 
ment. 

NoAv, I can finish in one or two more sentences. It is a grave 
question Avhether the Choctaw Nation alone is responsible and should 
be required to compensate, if anybody does compensate these Indians, 
for the injustice. I am not prepared to say here what I think about 
it. but it seems to us that the committee ought to be agreed that 
these Indians are on earth. They have been injured and they ought 
to liave some relief, and the committee, then, should say what the 
relief should be; nnd, as a prerequisite to tliat, we are agreed that we 
should know Avho they are, how many they are, and where they are. 

The Secretary of the Interior, in writing, states that there are 
lecords in his office now. or in the office of the Commissioner to the 
Five Civilized Tribes, they heretofore having received applications 
for 24,000. and taken testimony on them, covering practically all 
jnei'itorious cases. They can probably make up a list that will in- 
clude all who have the right and wdio ought to be included in the 
list of those to whom relief should be given. 

Mr. Carter. No doubt that would depend almost entirely upon 
Avhom the Secretary would refer it to, would it not, Mr. Miller? 

Mr. Miller. I do not know. I will say this to you, Mr. Carter; If 
this is left as it is, the Secretary of the Interior would submit a 
very small list; and the way we have drawn this is not to open it 
up, not to let every Tom, Dick, and Harry have an investigation, 
but to take it uj) and determine where the meritorious cases are and 
then 

INIr. BiKKE. Would you examine the 24,000 cases that have been 
itcted upon by the Dawes Commission? 

Mr. Miller. You understand, Mr. Burke, one single case may in- 
volve a thousand cases. 

Mr. Burke. I understand; but you said that something like 24,000 
cases have been examined, and they have enrolled how many? 



REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. R. 19213. 29 

Mr. Miller. 1.445. 

jMr. Burke. Now. it is your suggestion that you propose to order 
the department to reexamine all the balance of the thousands of 
eases to see whether there are persons who have been identified that 
were not there that ought to have been there ? 

Mr. Miller. I do not think the commission ought to reexamine 
the balance of these cases because 

Mr. Burke. But you contemplate that they may examine? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. That would depend upon Avho it was referred to. If 
it was referred to one man in the department, it would be limited 
to a small list; if referred to another, there would be more. 

Mr. Burke. Now, in your opinion, is there not a considerable num- 
ber of persons in addition to those 20,000 or more that would ])rob- 
ably have just as much merit in their cases as the 20,000 or so? 

Mr. Miller. I do not think so. I am very strongly of the opinion 
that Mr. McKinnon made a very conscientious and honest investiga- 
tion of Mississippi and the surrounding country, though I do not 
suppose they got absolutely all of the cases. It would not be expected 
that a man should get every one, but I do believe that he got the great 
bulk of the meritorious cases. I have had the Secretary prepare me a 
list showing the Mississippi Choctaws who are enrolled. I have Mr. 
McKinnon's list whereon has been indicated those Avho were finally 
enrolled as citizens and those Avho were not. 

Mr. Burke. ]Mr. Davenport called my attention to the fact that he 
thinks Mr. Bixby Avent through there also making some enrollment. 

Mr. Miller. Yes; I would not restrict it to this one report. 

The Chairman. We have had an attorney before us by the name 
of Xichols. I think he represented Brown. Was that case taken into 
consideration by the committee? 

Mr. INIiLLER. That particular case w^as referred to a subcommittee, 
of which I was chairman, a year or two ago, and while we were 
agreed that the Nichols family should be enrolled, it was thought best 
to defer his case until the general enrollment question could be 
considered. 

Mr. Burke. He is a Choctaw who was not enrolled ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir; he is entitled to citizenship. 

Mr. Carter. He could apply, could not he. under this B class of 
yours ? 

Mr. Miller. Under tlie B class ; yes. 

Mr. Carter. In fact, could anybody be prevented from making 
application uiider it? 

^fr. INIiLLEK. That would dei)end upon just how the committee 
framed (hat passage. I Avill say. as I originally drew that, as I 
ihiiik the chairman of our subcommittee Avill remember. I suggested 
the phraseology be " now in his office or under his control." Then 
I thouirht that Avould perhaps not be fair, so I struck out the word 
" now." 

:\rr. Carit.k. " Now " would limit it to 24.000. would it not? 

Mr. ]\fiLLER. I can conceive that there will be more than 24.000. 

Mr. Car'jer. I saw in Mr. Hariison's iiitervicAV that it will be about 
.'.0.000. 

I want to ask Mr. Miller if he considered in his investigation ihe 
Jack -Vmos case. I notice that he did not mention anv(hin<2: alxMit it. 



30 REPORT AND STATEMENT ON H. E, 19213. 

Mr. IVTiLLEK. Yes; tlio Jack Amos case is a fair decision. I have 
no quarrel with it: but it liinoes on the feature that the chiimant 
shoukl have been removed. 

Mr. Carteu. The thiiio- I wanted the record to show was that the 
Jack Amos case was taken up by the Dawes Commission as a Missis- 
sippi Choctaw case when they first came to Okhihoma, was appealed 
to the Federal court — the Dawes Commission havino- decirled ag-ainst 
it on the i>rounds of residence — ^was confirmed by the Federal court, 
and appealed from the Federal court on the grounds of jurisdiction 
to the United States Supreme Court, and the decision of the lower 
court was affirmed. 

Mr. Warburton. That was the original treaty, and there never has 
been any other treaty since that time. They have never rescinded 
their rights. 

Mr. BiRKE. Before we adjourn, I assume that Mr. Miller is re- 
]iorting the results of this investigation made by this subcommittee, 
and 1 understand that the subconnnittee concurred in what he has 
said, and he has made a very elaborate and, I think, convincing argu- 
ment. Now. I think ^Ii-. Carter, who is very familiar with this subject, 
ought to have an opportunity to examine the report of the subcom- 
mittee and the statement made by Mr. Miller, and that we hear Mr. 
Carter as to what he may have to say. I think before we discuss 
it, ]f we could get the other side of it we would have it printed. 

The Chairman. Yes; but have it printed first. 

jVlr. Hayden. We haA'e here the two governors of these tribes, who 
are very familitir with this, and likewise these tribal attorneys, who 
are familiar with it. and I think there are a lot of things that ought 
to be taken up in connection with it, and I think that Mr. Carter is 
sure the}' ought to be heard. 

Mr. Burke. I think, from what I have heard from Mr. Miller, that 
the subcommittee has handled this matter quite fully. 

Mr. Ferris. Of course; but, as I understand, they do not propose 
to recommend this particular bill. They merely gave us this informa- 
tion looking to the framing of some particular bill. 

Mr. Mieeer. I wdl say this: "\Ve do not believe that this bill should 
joass at all. In fact, this bill requires eveiy applicant to identify 
himself as a descendant from an ancestor Avho received or was entitled 
to receive land under article 14, and yet the testimony of everybody 
who is familiar with the situation is that if we should require most 
of the full bloods to establish such ancestry it is something which they 
can not do. 

Mr. Burke. Mr. Miller, I would suggest that before the statement 
you made to-day is printed that you insert references to the Su])reme 
Court decisions and the Court of Claims. 

The CiiAiRAiA^. I would suggest that we have this all ]n-inted as 
hearing No. 11. 

jMr. RissELE. I will come down during the day and dictate in sub- 
stance the statement 1 made to the whole committee at our last meet- 
ing. There was no stenographer here then for that ]^urpose. 

Mr. Smith. Then, will you have the time fixed for the statement? 

The CiiAHniAN. AVc will get the statement from the Interior De- 
partment. 

Thereuj^on. at 1'2.10 o'chx'k p. m., the connnittee adjourned. 

X 



Part Three 



MEMORIAL OF THE 

CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW 

NATIONS 



RELATIVE TO THE 



Rights of the Mississippi Choctaws 



SUBMITTED FOR CONSIDERATION 
IN CONNECTION WITH H. R. 19213 



r 



WASHINGTON 
1913 



MEMORIAL OF THE 

CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS 

RELATIVE TO THE RIGHTS OF THE MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAWS, SUB- 
MITTED FOR CONSIDERATION IN CONNECTION WITH HOUSE BILL 
19213. 



Any claim which the Mississippi Choctaw Indians may have to 
share in the lands and other property of the Choctaw Nation in the 
State of Oklahoma is based on the fourteenth article of the treaty of 
September 27, 1830, commonly known as the treaty of Dancing 
Rabbit Creek. In order to fully understand the history of this ques- 
tion it is necessary to start with the treaty of October 18, 1820, be- 
tAveen the United States and the Clioctaw Nation, under which the 
title of the Choctaws to their lands west of the Mississippi was 
acquired. 

The purposes of this treaty are stated in the preamble, which is as 
follows : 

VVIaereas it is an iriiportaut object witli the President of the United States to 
promote the civilization of the Choctaw Indians by the establishment of 
schools amongst them and to perpetuate them as a nation by exchanging for 
a small part of their land here a country beyond the Mississippi River, where 
all who live by hunting and will not work may be collected and settled to- 
gether ; and 

Whereas it is desirable to the State of Mississippi to obtain a small part of the 
land belonging to said nation : For the mutual accommodation of the parties 
and for securing the happiness and protection of the whole Choctaw Nation, 
as well as preserving that harmony and friendship which so happily subsists 
between them and the United States, James Monroe, President of the United 
States of America, by Andrew Jackson, of the State of Tennessee, major 
general in the Army of the United States, and Gen. Thomas Hinds, of the 
State of Mississippi, commissioners plenipotentiai'y of the United States, on 
the one part, and the Mingoes, headmen and warriors of the Choctaw Nation, 
in full council assembled, on the other part, have freely and voluntarily en- 
tered into the following articles, viz: * * * (7 Stat. L., 210.) 

By article 1 of said treaty the Choctaw Nation ceded a portion of 
their land in the State of Mississippi, amount inoj to about 4,000,000 
acres, to the United States, in the following words: 

ARTirr.K 1. To enable the President of the United States to carry into effect 
the above grand and humane objects the Mingoes,- lieadmen and warriors of 
the Cliof-taw Nation, in full council assembled, in behalf of themselves and the 
said nation, do by these presents cede to the United States of America all the 
land lying and being within the boundaries following, to wit: * * *. 

Here follows a description by metes and bounds of the ceded ter- 
ritory. 

Article 2 of said treaty is as follows: 

For and in consideration of the foregoing cession on the part of the Choctaw 
Nation, and in part satisfaction for the same, the conunissioners of the United 
States, in behalf of said States, do hereby cede to said nation a tract of country 

3 



4 MEMOEIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

west of the Mlssissipi)! Kiver situate between the Arkansas and lied Rivers, and 
bounded as follows: Be.i,'inninfr on the Arkansas Kiver where the lower boundary 
line of the Cherokees strikes the same; thence up the Arkansas to the Canadian 
Fork, and up the sr.me to its source; thence due south to the Red River; 
thence down Red River 3 miles below' the mouth of Little River, which empties 
itself into Reil Itiver on the north side; thence a direct line to the beginning. 

The land therohv iic(|uire(l by the Choctaw Nation in exchange for 
the 4.000,000 acres of tlieir hind in the State of Mississippi embraced 
all of the land that the Choctaw Nation ever acquired west of the 
Mississippi River. 

During the decade following the date of this treaty the Southeast- 
ern States were being raj)idly settled by white persons, and it was 
determined by the authorities of the United States that it was de- 
sirable to effectuate the removal of all the Indians residing in that 
locality to a territory to be set apart to them west of the Mississippi 
River. The Choctaws by their treaty of 1820 had already acquired 
a large domain west of the river, and commissioners were sent to 
Mississippi to treat with them and to obtain, if possible, their removal 
to their lands west. Accordingly the treaty of September 27, 1830, 
was negotiated. On behalf of the United States John H. Eaton and 
John Coffee were appointed commissioners, and they were instructed 
to proceed to Mississippi for the purpose of entering into a treaty 
with the Choctaws. On the 18th day of September, 1830, the said 
commissioners met the chiefs and headmen of the Choctaws and de- 
livered to them a " talk," as it is called in the journal of the commis- 
sioners. This talk was for the purpose of inducing the Indians to 
enter into negotiations with the commissioners, and as showing the 
representations made to the Indians will be here quoted. The mate- 
rial parts of it are as follows: 

By direction of your great father we have come amongst you. It is not 
your lands we seek, but your happiness. If you remain you will be subject 
to tlie jurisdiction of courts, pay taxes, etc.. and if you are satisfied that In 
such a condition you would be imhappy, then agree to remove beyond the 
Mississijipi, where you will be able to live under your own laws. Record the 
votes of your headmen and let us know who is w'illing to move and who are 
opposed. In 1820. by a treaty, a fine country was given you for the use of your 
people. It was the understanding at that time that the Choctaws would remove. 
Ten years are passed and you are still here. If you prefer to live here, sui'- 
render the lauds west or otherwise remove to them. Hereafter we will not 
treat with you. (21 C. Cls. Rep., p. 61.) 

Even to the imtutored mind of the Indian this language could 
not be misunderstood. There was presented the alternative of re- 
maining in Mississippi, forfeiting the lands which they had acquired 
by solemn compact in the West, becoming subject to the white man's 
laAvs, to the jurisdiction of his courts and to taxation, or leaving 
their homes in Mississippi and removing to their territory in the 
AVest. 

The Choctaws were surprised at the proposition and representa- 
tions of the commissioners in regard to the forfeiture by them of 
their lands in the West if they did not remove to them, as no such 
condition had been placed in the treaty of 1820, and at first refused 
to treat with the commissioners of the United States. The com- 
missioners thereupon threatened to withdraw and no longer treat 
with them, and a few days later the Choctaws, being fearful of the 
consequences of their refusal, presented certain proposals for a 
treaty of their own accord. The}'^ agreed that their people would 



MEMOEIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 5 

remove to their lands west of the Mississij^pi, but demanded that 
those who had improA^ements in Mississippi and were willing to 
remoAe should be granted certain reservations, the amount of the 
i-eserve being dependent upon the acreage under cultivation, and 
insisted that those who desired to remain should also be taken care 
of, Avith the understanding that the}^ should become citizens of the 
State in Avhich the}' resided and thereby subject to all the laAvs of 
said State. That part of their proposal bearing on this subject is as 
follows : 

Also, such persons wishing to become citizens, and who are Iieads of families, 
shall be entitled, for himself or herself, to a section of land; and having lived 
npon and cultivated the same for six years after the ratification of this treaty, 
shall receive a grant in fee; the location shall be bounded by sectional lines aiid 
include his or her dwelling. (21 C. Cls. Rep., p. 63.) 

The treaty was finally concluded on September 27, 1830, and the 
proposals of the Choctaws were in a measure adopted. Tayo classes 
of reservations Avere provided for by the treaty. Article 14, under 
Avhich the Mississippi ChoctaAv claim arises, is as follows : 

Art. 14. Each Choctaw head of a family being desirous to remain and become 
a citizen of the States shall be permitted to do so by signifying his inten- 
tion to the agent within six months from the ratification of this treaty, and 
he or she shall thereupon be entitled to a reservation of one section of 640 
acres of land, to be bounded by sectional lines of survey ; in like manner shall 
be entitled to one-half that quantity for each unmarried child which is living 
with him over 10 years of age, and a quarter section to such child as may be 
under 10 years of age, to adjoin the location of the parent. If they reside upon 
said lands, intending to become citizens of the States, for five years after the 
ratification of this treaty, in that case a grant in fee simple shall issue; said 
reservation shall include the present improvement of tlie head of the family, or 
a portion of it. Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privi- 
lege of a Choctaw citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any 
portion of the Choctaw annuity. (7 Stat. L., 335.) 

This article provides for those who desired to remain and become 
citizens of the States. Article 19 provides for reservations to those 
who intended to remoA'e and had improvements in Mississippi. 

The treaty Avas not ratified until February 24, 1831, and on May 21, 
1831, the War Department, then having charge of the Indian affairs, 
advised Col. Ward, Indian agent in Mississippi, to open a register of 
claims under the fourteenth article and another list for those Indians 
claiming under the nineteenth article. Ward advised the department 
on June 31, 1831, that he had opened such registers and Avas receiving 
the claims of the Indians. 

The history of these transactions shoAvs clearly that the authorities 
of the United States as Avell as the State authorities of Mississippi 
did all in their poAver to get the Indians to move and discouraged as 
much as possible registrations under the fourteenth article. The six 
months provided by the treaty Avithin which the Indians could signify 
their intention to remoA^e expired on August 24, 1831. and the records 
kept by Col. Ward shoAv that comparatiA^ely fcAV Indians Avere regis- 
tered by him as being desirous of remaining in the State. It Avas 
afterAvards chargccl. hoAvever. that the Indians had not been fairly 
dealt Avith, and that many of those Avho appeared before AVard for 
the purpose of registering under the fourteenth article Avere turned 
aAvay Avithout their names being listed. Accordingly, by acts of Con- 
gress approved March 3, 1837, and February 22, 1838 (see Appendix 
No. 1), commissioners AA-ere appointed for the purpose of proceeding 



6 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

to Mississippi and investigating the complaints lodged against the 
conduct of Ward. 

By the year 1838 a greater part of the Choctaw Tribe had removed 
west of the Mississippi Eiver. In the report of the Commissioner of 
Indian Affairs dated December 1, 1836, it is stated that the whole 
number of Choctaw Indians in Mississippi at the date of the treaty 
of 1830 amounted to 18,500 persons, and he estimated that 15.000 of 
these had emigrated to Indian Territory at the date of his report. 
In the report of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs dated November 
1, 1838, he shows that 177 Indians had emigrated since his report of 
1836, making the total number who had removed to Indian Territory 
amount to 15,177 by November 1, 1838. 

In the report of F. W. Armstrong, special agent, submitted in 1834, 
and found in American State Papers, volume 7, at page 139. the whole 
number of Choctaws in Mississippi in 1830 is given as 19,209. The 
commissioners who went to Mississippi under the acts of 1837 and 
1838 reported that there were yet remaining in Mississippi on the 
31st day of July, 1838, about 5,000 Choctaw Indians. So from these 
figures it is probable that the enumeration of Special Agent Arm- 
strong is more nearly correct than that contained in the report of 
the Commissioner of Indian Affairs above referred to, and that in the 
j-^ear 1838 about 5,000 still remained in Mississippi. 

In spite of the fact that so many Indians were still in Mississippi, 
and that probably many of them were fourteenth article claimants, 
patents were issued under the fourteenth article to only 143 heads of 
families. The total number of persons to whom patents were issued, 
including the children, amounted to 276. To afford relief to the large 
number of Indians who had been denied their rights under the four- 
teenth article, by act of Congress approved August 23, 1842 (5 Stat. 
L., 513), a new commission was appointed to proceed to Mississippi 
and adjudicate the claims of all ChoctaAv Indians who yet remained 
ihere and claimed that they had been deprived of their rights under 
the fourteenth article by reason of the arbitrary action of the agents 
of the United States. (See Appendix No. 2.) 

The number of heads of families Avho established their rights under 
the act of 1842 is 1,155, the total number of persons whose claims were 
thus favorably adjudicated, including the children, amounted to 
about 4,000. In House of Eepresentatives Document No. 898. Sixty- 
first Congress, second session, is given a list of the patentees under the 
fourteenth article and a list of those persons whose claims were 
favorably adjudicated under the act of August 23, 1842. This latter 
(lass, under the terms of the act referred to. were to receive scrip in 
lieu of the land to which they would have been entitled as fourteenth 
article beneficiaries. This scrip entitled the holder to take up un- 
occupied ])ublic domain in the States of Mississippi, Arkansas, Ala- 
bama, and Louisiana equal in quantity to the amount of land the 
holder thereof would have been entitled to under the fourteenth 
article, not exceeding one half of the same to be issued to the claimant 
in Mississii)pi and the other half to be issued upon his removal west 
of the Mississii)pi River. jMan\ of the Indians still remaining in 
Mississippi, as shown b}^ the report of the commissioner in 1838, emi- 
grated to the Choctaw Nation west between that year and the year 
1 855. There are on file in the office of the Commissioner of Indian 
Affairs nnister rolls of emigrating Choctaws which show that during 



MEMOEIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 7 

the period stated — that is, from 1838 to 1855 — more than 3,400 Choc- 
taws removed to the Indian Territory. It will thus be seen that, 
taking the figures of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs to the effect 
that 15,000 Choctaws had emigrated i^rior to 1836, the total number 
of Choctaws who were in Indian Territory at the date of the treaty of 
1855 was over 18,500, leaving in Mississippi not more than 1,000 of 
the original members of the nation. 

The first half of the scrip was delivered to those persons found 
entitled thereto under the act of 1842, or to their representatives, 
withiii a few years after the adjudication of their claims. How- 
ever, by act of Congress of March 3, 1845 (5 Stat. L., 777), it was 
provided that the balance of the scrip, being the second half of the 
payment, should not be paid to the Indians, but that it should be 
capitalized at $1.25 per acre and the interest accruing thereon, at 
the rate of 5 per cent per annum, should be paid to the Indians or 
their representatives. This was done, and no change took place in 
the law until July 21, 1852, Avhen by act of Congress approved that 
day (10 Stat. L., p. 19) it was provided that the amount yet due 
these Indians in scrip under the original act should be paid to them 
in money instead of scrip, and the sum of $872,000, which was the 
value of the scrip undelivered, by estimating the land at $1.25 per 
acre, should be paid to the Choctaws in cash. (See Appendix No. 3.) 

It has been intimated in the arginnents submitted on this bill that 
this money did not reach the hands of the persons for whom it was 
intended, but that it was paid out to the Choctaw Nation in Indian 
Territory. The records relative to this payment are easy of access. 
They are found in the office of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs 
i'.nd the Auditor for the Interior Department, and show that the 
sum of $872,000 was delivered by the Government to Philip H. 
Kaiford, Indian agent, under date of September 11, 1852. Agent 
Raiford, in the month of November, 1852, turned this money over to 
Indian Agent John Drennen, and in the same month Dr'^nnen turned 
the money over, by requisition, to William Wilson, Indian agent, who 
paid out the greater part of same to the persons entitled thereto under 
ihe award made by the commission appointed under the act of 1842. 
Wilson's accounts are a matter of record in the auditor's office and 
show that prior to June 4, 1853, he paid out of this monev to indi- 
vidual claimants, under article 14, $680,300 principal and $36,530.63 
interest. Tliis money was paid to 2,983 persons, whose names appear 
on his pay roll. 

Wilson turned over the balance of the money in his hands to Doug- 
las H. Cooper, agent to the Choctaws, in June, 1853, and Cooper's 
accounts on file in the same place show that by August, 1854, he had 
paid out $59,533.94 of this money to 300 individual claimants. The 
accounts of Cooper for the last two quarters of 1854 and the first 
quarter of 1855 can not be found, but it is presumed the balance of 
this money was paid out to individual claimants in the same manner. 

It is impracticable in this l)rief to give a list of all the persons to 
whom this money was paid. However, it can be stated that avo have 
compared a number of the names on these pay rolls with the list of 
scripees and find that the persons to whom this money Avas paid are 
persons whom the commission of 1842 found entitled to scrip under 
the terms of said act, they being fourteenth-article beneficiaries or 
their descendants. 



b MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

There was probably very little emigration from Mississippi to 
Indian Territory from 1855 until after the Civil War. However, a 
study of the Choctaw law books will show that there was a continu- 
ous emigration of small parties from Mississippi and Louisiana to 
Indian Territory from 1866 until the Government of the United 
States took over the affairs of the Choctaw Nation and prohibited 
the nation from any further admissions to citizenship. These books 
contain numerous acts admitting to full rights and privileges of 
citizenship persons emigrating from Mississippi to Indian Territory 
during these years. A few of these acts are hereto appended, which 
will show that they have not only received the emigrating Choctaws 
into full rights of citizenship, but in many cases appropriated money 
out of their national funds to pay the expenses of their emigration 
and to assist them in subsisting in the nation until they could become 
self-sup]Dorting. (See Appendix No. 4.) 

On at least one occasion, in the year 1889, the Choctaw Council 
memorialized Congress to assist in the emigration of the Choctaws in 
the States of Mississippi and Louisiana to the Choctaw Nation, and 
on another occasion, in the year 1891, by act of the Choctaw Council 
a commission was appointed to proceed to Mississippi and take what 
steps seemed advisable in order to obtain the affiliation of the Eastern 
Choctaws with the main body of the tribe in the West and the emi- 
gration of the former to Indian Territory. A large number of such 
Indians were emigrated by reason of the activities of the commission. 

This is the history, in brief, of the Mississippi Choctaws up until 
1896, when the United States took charge of the enrollment affairs 
of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations and undertook to allot their 
lands in severalt3^ 

That the Choctaw Indians who had voluntarily separated them- 
selves from the tribal government and citizenship were not entitled 
to share in that government or the distribution of the tribal property 
while residing outside of the jurisdiction of the Nation seems never 
to have been questioned until within recent years. An examination 
of the provisions of the treaty of 1830, and the history relative to the 
making of that treaty, shows conclusively that the principal object 
of the treaty was the removal of the Choctaw Indians from Missis- 
sippi to their lands in the West. In the treaty of 1820, under which 
the Choctaws acquired title to their western domain, there was no 
limitation imposed requiring them to live upon- the land. In spite 
of this fact, such a limitation was placed in the treaty of 1830, and 
they were compelled to agree to remove beyond the Mississippi as 
early as practicable after the ratification of said treaty. These pro- 
visions contained in the treaty are as follows : 

Articli: 2. The United States, uiuler a srant specially to be made by tbe 
President of the United States, shall cause to be conveyed to the Choctaw 
Nation a tract of country west of the IMississiinn River, in fee simple to them 
and thoir descendants, to inure to them while they shall exist as a nation and 
live on it. 

Here follows a description of a part of the land ceded bv the treaty 
of 1820. 

Article 3 of said treat}^ is as follows : 

In consideration of the provisions contained in the several articles of this 
treaty, the Choctaw Nation of Indians consent and hereby cede to the United 
States the entire country they own and possess east of the Mississippi River; 



MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 9' 

aud they agree to reuiove beyond tlie Mississippi River early as practicable, 
aud will so arrange their removal that as niauy as possible of their peoiile. not 
exceeding one-half of the whole number, shall depart during the falls of 1S31 
aud 1832, the residue to follow during the succeeding fall of 1S33; a better 
opportunity in this manner will be afforded the Government to extend to them 
the facilities and comforts which it is desirable should be extended in conveying 
them to their new homes. 

This enforced removal of the ChoctaAvs as a nation to the West t 
was not agreed to by them until article 14 was placed in the treaty, 
which permitted Choctaw Indians who desired to renounce their 
•Choctaw citizenship to remain in the States and become citizens 
thereof. That this was the purpose of the fourteenth article is shown 
by all of the available records bearing upon the drawing up of this 
treaty. The Choctaws themselves proposed this provision, and it was 
incorporated in the treaty for the express purpose of permitting 
Choctaw Indians who desired to do so to become citizens of the States 
and as such to have a reservation of land set apart to them in the 
State of Mississippi. 

The only part of that article which is in any way subject to dispute 
is the last sentence thereof. 

The Indians had been threatened by the commissioners of the 
United States with the forfeiture of their lands in the West which 
they had bought and paid for unless they speedily removed thereto 
and took up their homes thereon. They were told that if they re- 
mained in Mississippi they would be stibjected to the jurisdiction of 
the government of the State, and that their lands and other property 
would be taxed. There is no doubt but that those who elected to re- \ 
main knew they were renouncing their Choctaw citizenship and were 
becoming citizens of the State in which they took up their residence. 
The last sentence of said article, therefore, was inserted with the idea 
that those who remained in the States and took up their citizenship 
therein would be guaranteed the privilege of removing to their 
nation if conditions became too harsh for them in the States, and 
upon such removal were to be entitled to all the privileges of a Choc- 
taw citizen, except the right to share in the annuities. 

This construction is well set forth in the decision rendered in the ^ 
United States court for the central district of Indian Territory in 
the year 1897, in the case of Jack Amos et al. v. The Choctaw Nation. 
(See report of Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes of June 30, 
1809, p. 92.) In discussing this provision the cdurt states as follows: 

In the third article of the treaty the Choctaws agreed to move all of their 
people within three j^ears, aud the United States intended that tliey should go. 
But, by the fourteenth article of the treaty, provisions were made whereby 
those who should decide to remain and become citizens of the State of Missis- 
sippi, in the event that, because of the intolerance and persecutions of the 
whites which they themselves had so bitterly experienced, or for any other 
cause, they might become dissatisfied with their altered conditions and their 
new citizenship and desire to follow them to their new liomes, and thereafter 
exercise with them in their own country the privileges of citizenship, they 
could do so, except that they were not to participate with them in their 
annuities, the lands which they were to receive in Mississippi being deemed a 
compensation for that. 

When the fourteenth article of the treaty was framed the negotiating parties 
understdod that the policy of the United States was that Ihe Choctaws were 
to be removed. The Choctaws. in article 3, had just agreed that they should 
all go. The ink was not yet dry in article 2, whereby the condition was placed 
in this grant to the lands that they were to live ui)on them or they should be 
forfeited, aud that no privilege of citizenship could be conferred or enjoyed 



10 MEMORIAL OP THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

outside of the territorial jurisdiction of their newly located nation. Under 
standing these conditions, the latter clause of article 14 was penned: 

" Persons who claim under this article shall iiot lose the privilege of a 
Choctaw citizen, but if they ever remove — that is, if they ever place themselves 
on the land and within the jurisdiction of the nation whei-eby those privileges 
may become operative — are not to be entitled to any portion of the Choctaw 
annuity." 

In other words, if they ever remove, they are to enjoy all of the privileges 
of a Choctaw citizen except that of participating in their annuities. If this 
he not the meaning to be attached to the word ''remove" as use<l in the clause 
of the treaty under consideration, it must be meaningless. But in the inter- 
pretation of statutes it is the duty of the court to so interpret them as to giv6 
to every word a meaning, and in doing so it must take into consideration the 
whole statute, its objects and purposes, the rights which are intended to be 
enfowed, and the evils intended to be remedied: it may go to the liistory of 
the transaction about which the legislation is had and call to its aid all legiti- 
mate facts proven or of which the courts will take judicial notice in order 
to find the true meaning of the word as used in the statute. Of course, the same 
rule of interpretation applies to treaties. Adopting these rules in the inter- 
pretation of article 14 of the treaty of 1830, I arrive at the conclusion that the 
'•privilege of a Choctaw citizen" therein reserved to those Choctaws who 
shall remain, thereby separating themselves, it may be forever, from their 
brethren and their nation, becoming citizens of another sovereignty and aliens 
of their own, situated so that it would be impossible, while in Mississippi, to 
receive or enjoy any of the rights of Choctaw citizensliip, was the right to 
renounce his allegiance to the Commonwealth of Mississippi, move upon the 
lands conveyed to him and his people, and there, the only spot on earth where 
he could do so, renew his relations with his people and enjoy all of the 
privileges of a Choctaw citizen except to participate in the annuities. 

As an evidence that the Choctaw people themselves took this view of the 
question, attention is called to the fact that their council has passed many acts 
and resolutions inviting these absent Choctaws to move into their country, and 
on one occasion appropriated a considerable sum of money to assist them 
on their journey; and, until the past two or three years, have always promptly 
placed those who did return on the rolls of citizenship, but never enrolletl an 
absent Choctaw as a citizen. 

That this is the intent and meaning of article 14 is further in- 
dicated by the treaty of 1866. entered into between the United States 
and the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. Under this treaty a scheme 
was provided for the allotment of the lands belonging to these two 
nations in severalty to the members thereof. The lands were first 
to be surveyed, and thereafter a specified time was given for the 
citizens to select their allotment so as to include their improvements. 
Notice of the rights of the citizens Avas to be given wide publicity, 
and by article 13 of §aid treaty it is provided : 

The notice required in the above article shall be given not only in the Choc- 
taw and Chickasaw Nations but by publication in newspapers in-inted in the 
States of Mississippi and Tennessep. Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and Alabama, 
to the end that such Choctaws and Chickasaws as yet remain outside of the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations may be informed and have opportunity to 
exercise the rights hereby given to resident Choctaws and Chickasaws: Pro 
Tided. That before any such absent Choctaw or Chickasaw shall be permitted 
to select for himself or herself or others, as hereinafter provided, he or she 
shall .satisfy the register of the land office of his or her intention, or the inten- 
tion of the party for whom selection is to be made, to become bona fide resi- 
dent in the said nation within five years from the time of selection; and should 
the said absentee fail to remove into said nation and occupy and commence 
an imi)rovement on the land selected within the time aforesaid the said selec- 
tion shall be canceled and the land shall thereafter be discharged from all 
claim on account thereof. 

The patent evidencing the title of the Choctaws to their western 
lands was executed by the President on March 23, 1842, and in this 
patent the same limitations found in the treaty of 1830 were inserted, 



MEMOEIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 11 

providing for a possibility of reversion in the United States. This 
provision in the patent is as follows : 

That the United States of America, in consideration of tlie premises and in 
execution of tlie agreement and stipulation in the aforesaid treaty, have given 
and granted and by these presents do give and grant unto the said Choctaw 
Nation the aforesaid " tract of country west of tlie Mississippi," to have and to 
hold the same, with all the rights, privileges, immunities, and appurtenances 
of whatsoever nature thereunto belonging, as intended " to be conveyed " by the 
aforesaid article, " in fee simple to them and their descendants, to inure them, 
while they shall exist as a nation and live on it." liable to no transfer or 
alienations, except to the United States or with their consent. 

This constitutes a base or determinable fee, and it is inconsistent 
with the manner in which the title to this land 'was held that the In- 
dians wdio renounced their Chocta^v citizenship and refused to con- 
tinue their identification with the nation and share the responsibili- 
ties and burdens of citizenship should be entitled to share in its bene- 
fits. Xo one has ever objected to the Absentee Choctaws reidentifying 
themselves Avith the nation and being readmitted to the benefits of 
citizenship, and, on the other hand, the}^ have been requested and 
urged to return to the fold on every occasion. But objection has been 
raised to the extension of these benefits to them while they remain 
apart from the nation. 

A somewhat analogous question was decided by the Supreme 
Court in the case of the Eastern Band of Cherokees v. The United 
States (117 U. S., 288). This case had to do with the rights of the 
Absentee or Eastern Band of Cherokees to share in the distribution 
of the property and funds of the Cherokee Nation in Indian Terri- 
tory. The court, after reviewing the treaties relating to the same, 
concluded by saying: 

If Indians in that State (North Carolina), or in any other State east of the 
Mississippi wish to enjoy the benefits of the connnou property of the Cherokee 
Nation, in whatever form it may exist, they nmst. as lield by the Court of 
Claims, comply with the constitution and laws of the Cherokee Nation, and 
be readmitted to citizenship as there provided. They can not live out of its 
territory, evade the obligations and burdens of citizenship, and at the same 
time enjoy the benefits of the funds and common property of the nation. Those 
funds and that property were dedicated by the constitution of the Cherokees 
and were intended by the treaties with the United States for the I)enefit of 
the united nation, and not in any respect for those who had separated from 
it and become aliens to their nation. We can see no just ground on which the 
claim of the petitioners can rest in either of the funds held by the United 
States in trust for the Cherokee Nation. 

It may be said that in the Cherokee treaties there is no provision , 
similar to the last sentence of the fourteenth article of the treaty of 
1830. It is true there is no provision exactly similar to this clause, 
but if the construction which we believe is the proper construction 
to be given to this clause is adopted, that fact does not in any way 
destroy the similarity between the cases of the Absentee Cherokees 
and the Absentee Choctaws. for the real intention of the last clause 
of the fourteenth article Avas undoubtedly to guarantee to the ab- 
sent Choctaws that if they ever desired to move, upon doing so, 
they would be entitled to all the privileges of a Choctaw citizen 
except a share of the annuities. This has been the meaning given 
to this treaty by every court or tribunal which has ever passed 
upon it. 



12 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

In the case of Jack Amos et al. v. The Choctaw Nation, supra, the 
court further says: 

I am disposed to the o]iiuion, however, and will so hold, that the descendants 
of the Mississippi Choctaws by virtue of the fourteenth article of the treaty of 
1S30 are entitled to all of the rights of Choctaw citizenship, with all of the 
privileges and ])roperty rights incident thereto. pro\-ided they have renounced 
their allegiance to the i-overeignty of :Mississip)n by moving into the Choctaw 
Nation in good faith to live upon their lands, renewing their allegiance to that 
nation, and putting themselves in an attitude whereby they will be able to 
share in the burdens of their government. The reason for this conclusion is, 
to my mind, made morally certain when it is remembered that ever since the 
treaty of 1830, now for the period for nearly 67 years, with the exception of 
the past two or three years, the Choctaw Nation by its legislative enactments 
and by its acts so long continued that by custom they have become crystallized 
into law have universally admitted all who should remove to this country and 
rehabilitate them in all of the rights and privileges of citizenship enjoyed by 
themselves. 

In the arguments recently made on this question a resolution of 
the Choctaw Council has been referred to, and an attempt has been 
made to draw the inference therefrom that the Choctaw Nation 
officially recognized that the Choctaws in the States of Mississippi 
and Louisiana were entitled to all the rights and privileges of citizen- 
ship without removal. 

This resolution was passed on December 24, 1889, and is as follows : 

Whereas there are large numbers of Choctaws yet in the States of Mississippi 

and Louisiana who are entitled to all the rights and privileges of citizenship 

in the Choctaw Nation ; and 
Whereas they are denied all rights of citizenship in said States ; and 
Whereas they are too .poor to immigrate themselves into the Choctaw Nation: 

Therefore 

Be it resolved hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation asseniNed, That 
the United States Government is hereby requested to make provisions for the 
emigration of said Choctaws from said States to the Choctaw Nation, etc. 

If, however, this resolution is analyzed, it will be seen that it bears 
out exactly the contention made by us on this proposition, to wit, 
that these Indians were guaranteed the rights and privileges of 
Choctaw citizenship provided they removed to the Choctaw Nation. 
The language used is not that these Absentee Choctaws are entitled 
to the rights and privileges of citizenship as Choctaws in the States 
named, but that they are entitled to those rights in the Choctaw 
Nation, and the evident intention of the Choctaw authorities was 
that the United States should assist these absentee Indians in acquir- 
ing their rights by their removal to the Choctaw Nation. The mean- 
ing of this resolution, to paraphrase its language, is this: 

Whereas there are a large number of Choctaws in the States of 
Mississippi and Louisiana who, although electing to become citizens 
of those States, are denied all rights of citizenship in said States, and 

Whereas they are entitled to the rights and privileges of citizen- 
ship by removing to and identifying themselves with the Choctaw 
Nation, and 

Whereas they are too poor to immigrate themselves into the Choc- 
taw Nation, therefore be it. resolved, etc. 

This construction is borne out by the fact that every Mississippi 
I Choctaw who emigrated into the Choctaw Nation after its passage 
was required to make formal application to the council and be ad- 
mitted to citizenship before he was allowed to participate in the 



MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 13 

government of the nation or share in any of the benefits of citizen- 
ship. If he was already a citizen, why was this requirement made? 

Another argument which is used in favor of this legislation is 
that the Choctaw Nation by its proper authorities executed and de- 
livered to the United States an agreement to the effect that the pay- 
ment of the $872,000, to take up the second half of the scrip due to 
fourteenth article claimants under the act of August 23, 1842, would 
be received as a final payment and satisfaction of said awards, and 
that by such agreement the Choctaw Nation became responsible to 
the claimants for the settlement of their individual claims. This act 
of the Choctaw Council, which was passed on November 6, 1852, is 
as follows: 

Whereas by an act of Congress entitled "An act to supi)ly deficiencies in tlie 
appropriations for the service of tlie fiscal year ending the oOtli day of Jnne. 
1852," all payments of interesif in the anionnt awarded Choctaw claimants nnder 
the fonrteenth article of the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek for lands on which 
they resided, but which it is impossible to give them, sliall cease, and tliat the 
Secretary of the Interior be directetl to pay said claimants tlie amount of the 
principal awards in each case, respectively, and that an amount necessary for 
this purpose be appropriated not exceeding the sum of .$872,000; and that final 
payment and satisfaction of said awards shall be first ratified and approved as 
a final release of all claims of such parties under tlie fourteenth article of said 
treaty by the proper national autliority of the Choctaws in such form as shall 
be prescribed by tlie Secretary of the Interior: Now be it known that the 
said General Council of the Choctaw Nation do hereby ratify and approve tlie 
final payment and satisfaction of said awards agreeably to the provisions of the 
act aforesaid as a final release of the claims of such parties under the four- 
teenth article of said treaty. 

A. Nail, Speaker. 

November 6, 1852. passed in the senate. 

Approved : 

D. McCoy, President. 
George W. Harkins. 
George Folsom. 

This act was passed by the Choctaw Council to comply with the 
proviso contained in the act of July 21, 1852, whereby this money 
was appropriated. This proviso is as follows: 

That tlie final payment and satisfaction of said awards shall be first ratified 
and approved as a final release of all claims of such parties under the four- 
teenth article of said treaty by the proper national authority of the Choctaws 
in such form as shall be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. 

The only national or tribal government of the Choctaw Indians at 
that time 'was the government in the Choctaw Nation west of the 
Mississippi, and this government was the only government to enter 
into such an agreement with the United States. This action, there- 
fore, was taken by the Choctaw authorities in pursuance of said act 
of Congress, and evidently in form as "prescribed by the Secretary 
of the Interior." 

It has heretofore been shown, however, that the money here appro- 
priated was not paid to the Choctaw Nation, but was paid to the 
individual claimants under the act of 1842 by an officer of the United 
States Government. Surely the Choctaw Nation can not be held 
accountable for this payment, since they had no hand in making it, 
nor was it possible for them to bind by this or any other agreement 
anyone but their own citizens. It would naturally be presumed that 
the United States, whose authorities made the payment, would see 



14 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

that the Mississippi Choctaws, who were not subject to the jurisdic- 
tion of the Choctaw Nation, but were citizens of the United States 
and the State in which they resided, were protected in this payment. 

Even though (he Choctaw Nation did by this act release the United 
States from the claims of the Mississippi Choctaw Indians under the 
fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830, this fact (which we do not 
admit) Avould not have any bearing upon the question under discus- 
sion. In determining this question, let us see just what claims were 
covered by the payment of the $872,000 provided for by the act of 
July 21, 1852. It was to take up the claims of those persons whose 
rights had been favorably adjudicated by the act of August 23. 1842. 
The purpose of this latter act was to adjudicate the claims of Indians 
to reservations of land in Mississippi under the fourteenth and nine- 
teenth articles of the treaty of 1830. For some reason no nineteenth- 
article claims were considered by the commission appointed under 
said act, and the only claims which were received and considered 
were those arising under the fourteenth article. This conunission, 
as has heretofore been shown, received and favorably adjudicated the 
claims of over 4,000 persons to reservations in the State of Missis- 
sippi. Scrip was issued to these persons, which permitted the taking 
up of any public domain in the States of Alabama, jNIississippi, 
Louisiana, and Arkansas equal to half of the land to which claim- 
ant Avould have been entitled under the fourteenth article. The 
$872,000 was appropriated to reimburse the claimants for the second 
half of the scrip, which had never been issued. Thus, if the Choctaw 
Nation had assumed the liabilities of the United States in favor of 
the fourteenth-article claimants, it was onh- a guaranty to the United 
States that the claimants would receive the second half of the pay- 
ment of scrip in money instead of land, and in no manner changed 
the relation of the Mississippi Choctaw Indians to the Choctaw 
Nation in respect to the domain of the Choctaws in the West. 

This $872,000 was not paid out by the United States to the whole 
body of Choctaws, but Avas paid out to those individuals or their 
heirs or representatives who had received a favorable adjudication of 
their claims by the commission appointed under the act of 1842. 

X carefid reading of the act of the Choctaw Council of November 
6, 1852, will show that all the Nation agreed to by said act was fo — 

ratify and approve the final payment and satisfaction of said awards agreeably 
to tlio ])ruvisions of tlie act aforesaid (act of July 21, 1S52) as a final release of 
the claims of such parties under the fourteenth article of said treaty. 

If any of the claimants were not paid their share of the $8^72.000 
the ChoctaAv Nation in no way assumed liability therefor. The fund 
was in the hands of the United States for disbursement, and all that 
the Choctaw Nation agreed to Avas that the final payment and satis- 
faction of said awards Avould act as a release of the claims of such 
parties. 

But the Supreme Court of the United States has passed upon the 
effect of this release of the Choctaw Nation in the case of the ChoctaAV 
Nation v. United States (119 U. S., 30), wherein it says: 

That act of Congress, it is true, declares that the final payment and satis- 
faction of the sum thereby appropriated and paid should, when ratified and 
approved by the proper national authority of the Choctaws. operate as a final 
release of all claims of tljose to wiiom such payments are made under the 
fourteenth article of the treaty of September 27. iS30. But whether tliat pay- 



MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 15 

meiit w;is a just and fair extingiiislinuMit of those claims, according to the terms 
of that treiity, was one of tlie very questions in dispute. And it is not un- 
reasonable to contend, as it is contended on behalf of the Choctaw Nation, that 
the effect of that release should be considered in view of the circumstance under 
which it was executed and in reference to which the Court of Claims has 
found, in the sixteenth finding, that " the claimants under the fourteenth article, 
the said Choctaw heads of fannlies and their children, were reduced to a 
helpless condition of want, which rendered it practically impossible for them 
to contend with the United States in their requirement that the said Choctaw 
heads of families should accejit and receive the scrip provided to be issued to 
them in lieu of the reservations Ity the act of 3S42: and the said scrip and the 
money paid to redeem the same were taken and accepted because they were 
powerless to enforce any demands against or impose any conditions upon the 
United States." 

It is also contended that many of the daims of individual Indians / 
under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830 entered into the so- 
called " net-proceeds " claims, and that the money obtained to satisfy 
the judgment rendered in that case was paid to the Choctaw Nation 
and not to the individual claimants. 

Let us examine the history of this case briefly : It is an undisputed 
fact that the United States Government did not perform the obliga- 
tions assumed by it under the terms of the treaty of 1830. By the 
treaty of 1855, which was entered into between the United States and 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, provision was made for the 
submission of the claims of the Choctaws against the United States, 
arising out of the treaty provisions, to the Senate of the United States 
as a court to arbitrate and determine what amount, if any, was due 
to the Indians. This provision is contained in article 11 of said 
treaty, and is as follows: 

The Government of the United States, not being prepared to assent to the 
claim set up under the treaty of September 27, 1830, and so earnestly contended 
for by the Choctaws as a rule of settlement, but justly appreciating the sacri- 
fices, faithful services, and general conduct of the Choctaw people, and being 
desirous that their rights and claims against the TTnited States shall receive 
a just, fair, and liberal consideration; it is therefore stipulated that the follow- 
ing questions be submitted for adjudication to the Senate of the United States: 

First. Whether the Choctaws are entitled to or shall be allowed the proceeds 
of the sale of the lands ceded by them to the United States by the treaty of 
September 27, 1S30, deducting therefrom the cost of their survey and sale, and 
all just and proper expenditures and payments under the provisions of said 
treaty ; and, if so, what price per acre shall be allowed to the Choctaws to the 
lands remaining unsold, in order that a final settlement with them may be 
promptly effected ; or 

Second. Whether the Choctaws shall be allowed a gross sum in further and 
full satisfaction of all their claims, national and individual, against the United 
States; and, if so, how much. 

By article 12 of said treaty it was provided that in case an award | 
was made by the Senate to the Choctaws the same would be received 
by them in full satisfaction of all their claims against the United 
States, whether national or individual, arising under any former 
treaty, the Choctaws thereupon agreeing to become lial)le to pay all 
individual claims as might be adjudged by the proper authoi'ities of 
the tribe to be equitable and just. I 

The claims provided for by this provision of the treaty of 1855 
must not be confused with the claims provided for by the act of Con- 
gress July 21, 1852. There were many unsettled points of dispute 
between the Choctaws and the United States at the time of the rati- 
fication of the treaty of 1855, involving claims arising under several 
old treaties, including the treaty of 1830. The.se disputes were to he 



16 MEMORIxVL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

settled by this provision of the treaty of 1855. The claims arising 
under the act of July 21, 1852, had their basis in the awards made by 
the commission acting under the act of Congress of August 23, 1842, 
and the $872,000 appropriated by said act was for the payment to 
claimants of the second half of the scrip found due by said com- 
mission. 

The conclusion reached by the Senate is contained in a resolution 
of March 9, 1859, providing that the Choctaws should be allowed the 
jDroceeds of the sale of their lands in Mississippi disposed of prior to 
January 1, 1859, deducting therefrom all ])roper expenditures for 
costs of the survey and sale of the same, deducting reservations and 
estimating scrip at $1.25 per acre and allowing them 12^ cents per 
acre for the residue unsold. The Secretary of the Interior was asked 
to cause an account to be stated under this award and report same 
to Congress. 

On ]Mav 8, 18G0, the Secretary" reported the amount due the 
Clioctaws "under this award to be $2,981,247.30. The sum of $250,000 
is all that was ever paid under this award, and the Civil War break- 
ing out soon after it was made no more money was appropriated to 
l^ay the same, probably by reason of the unsettled condition of the 
country at that time. Several years having elapsed and no settle- 
ment having been effected, the matter was by act of Congress ap- 
l)roved March 3, 1881, referred to the Court of Claims for determina- 
tion. This act is as follows: 

AN ACT For the ascertaiument of the amount due the Choctaw Nation. 

Whereas the Choctaw Nation, for itself and on behalf of individual members 
thereof, makes claim against the United States on account of various treaty 
provisions which it is alleged have not been complied with : Therefore 
Be it enacted by the Senate and the House of Representatives of the United 
States of Aincrica in Congress assembled, That the Court of Claims is hereby 
authorized to take .iurisdictiou of and try all questions of differences arising 
out of treaty stii)ulations with the Choctaw Nation and to render judgmeut 
MuMcon : power is hereby granted the said court to review the entire question 
of differences de novo, and it shall not be estopped by anyaction had or award 
made by the Senate of the United States in pursuance of the treaty of 1S55 ; 
and the Attorney General is hereby directed to appear in behalf of the Govern- 
ment ; and if said cotut shall decide against the United States the Attorney 
General shall, within 30 days from the rendition of judgment, appeal the cause 
to the Supreme Court of the United States: and from any judgment that may 
be rendered the said Choctaw Nation may also appeal to said Supreme Court: 
Provided, The appeal of the said Choctaw Nation shall be taken within 60 days 
after the rendition of said judgment, and thy said courts shall give such cause 
precedence. 

Six. 2. Said action shall be commenced by a petition stating the facts on 
whi<h said nation claims to recover and the amount of its claim; and said 
petition may be verified by either of the authorized delegates of said nation 
as to the existence of such facts, and no other statements need be contained in 
said petition or verification. 

The Coui't of Claims, after a full and voluminous record had been 
presented in the case, decided that under the peculiar provisions of 
the act giving them jurisdiction — 

The sanctity of the adjudication of the Senate has been destroyed by the law 
of our jurisdiction, and that the parties are remitted to their legal rights as 
they exist unafl'ected by the action of the Senate — 

and they proceeded to a trial of the claims de novo and found that 
the amount due the Choctaw Indians amounted to $658,120.32. 



MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 17 

In this award the right of the Choctaws to the net proceeds de- 
rived from the sale of their Lands in the State of Mississippi was 
denied, but there was inchided for daimants under the fourteenth 
article of the treaty of 1830, $417,056, which represented the claims 
of 191 families whose rights were defeated under the provisions of 
the act of 1842, and who the court held were entitled to 225,700 acres 
of land. These 191 claims were denied under the act of 1842 by 
reason of the peculiar wording of the act, requiring the claimant to 
have had improvements in the Choctaw Nation in Mississippi on 
September 27, 1830, and to have resided upon the land covered by 
the same for five years thereafter. This case is reported in volume 
21, Court of Claims report, page 59. 

An appeal was taken fi'om this judgment by both parties to the 
Supreme Court of the United States, and it was there determined 
that the amount due the Choctaw Indians was $2,858,798.02. The 
Supreme Court arrived at this judgment by going back to the award 
of the Senate made under the treaty of 1855, and in rendering its 
decision uses the following language, which will show how the 
amount of the award was arrived at by the Secretary of the Interior, 
who stated the account for the Senate under Senate resolution of 
March 9, 1859, to wit : 

The Secretary of the Interior found to be due the Choctaw Nation, in his 
statement of account in conformity with the resolutions and decision of the 
Senate under tlie treaty of 18.55, the sum of .$2.9S1.24T..30. This balance was 
reached liy crediting tliem with the proceeds of the sales of the lands ceded 
by them under tlie treaty of September 27, 1830, made up to .January 1, 1859, 
adding for the unsold residue of said lauds their estimated value at 12^ cents 
per acre, amounting to .$8,078,614.80 in the aggregate. Against this deductions 
were charged as follows: First, the cost of the survey and sale of the lands 
at 10 cents an acre; and, second, payments and expenditures under the treaty; 
the whole amounting to .$5,097,.367.50, resulting in the balance above stated. 
* ■* * The result, therefore, is to establish the balance found by the Secre- 
tary of the Interior as the true amount' due. ascertained according to the 
principle adjudged by the Senate in its award, and which we have declared to 
be the equitable rule of settlement between the parties. From this is to be 
deducted the payment of .$250,000 made under the act of March 2, 1861. 

There was added to this amount $59,449.32 for unpaid annuities 
and $08,102 for lands taken in fixing the boundary between the State 
of Arkansas and the Choctaw Nation, making the total amount of 
the aAvard of the Supreme Court amount to $2,858,798.02, and to this 
there was added the sum of $219,090.71 interest which had accrued 
from the time of the rendition of the judgment up until the appro- 
priation was made by Congress for the payment of the same. 

From an examination of the decision of the Supreme Court onr^ 
this case, it does not appear that a single individual claim of a four- 
teenth article benificiary entered into or was adjudicated in this case. 

Under the provisions of the treaty of 1855 this award was to be 
paid by the United States in full satisfaction for all claims, indi- 
vidual and national, arising under the treaties between the United 
States and the Choctaw Nation. The amount a))i)ropriated to pay 
this award was turned over to the Choctaw tribal authorities and 
distributed under their direction by an official of the United States 
Government. 

A reference to the laws of the Choctaw Nation will show that 
every effort was made by the tribal authorities to ascertain Avho were 

82G75— 1.3 2 



18 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

entitled to share in said aAvard and ample opportunity was given the 
individual claimants to appear and assert their rights. By act of 
the Choctaw Council, approved October 31, 1859, which was a short 
time after the award was made by the Senate, a court of claims 
was established to hear and determine the claims of all persons to 
share in this aAvard. This court was organized and held regular 
sessions, but its sittings were discontinued by the breaking out of the 
Civil AVar. Thereafter, under act of the general council of the 
Choctaw Xation, approved in 1872 and 1875, the court was reestab- 
lished and machinery was provided for the adjudication of all in- 
dividual claims. This court heard and allowed claims of this char- 
acter to the amount of $825,000. and by act of the Choctaw Council 
of Noveml>er 0, 1888, provision was made for the payment of these 
claims. The acts of October 21. 1859, and of November 6, 1888, are 
hereto attached, marked Appendix No. 5. A copy of the acts of 1872 
and 1875 can not be obtained, but their purport is shown by reference 
thereto in the act of 1888. 

It will thus be seen that the Choctaw Nation in receiving this 
money and undertaking to settle all claims arising under the treaty 
of 1830 and properly chargeable against the moneys received from 
said aAvard. made ever}" offort to ascertain to whom the award was 
due, and paid out the money to the original claimants or their heirs 
or representatives, if they were dead, under the supervision of the 
United States authorities. 

It has been argued by those in favor of this bill that not one cent of 
this award was paid to the Choctaw Indians in Mississippi. Whether 
or not this is true, we are not prepared to say. We have, however, 
already shown that 3,400 of the fourteenth-article claimants emi- 
grated to Indian Territory betAveen the years 1838 and 1855, and 
that many more of them emigrated west from the close of the Civil 
War to the year 1896. It is undoubtedly true that at the time this 
award was paid, which was in the year 1889, at least 80 per cent 
of the original fourteenth-article claimants or their descendants 
had removed to Indian Territory. If those who still remained in 
Mississippi at that date made no claim to this money, and received 
no part thereof, it was not the fault of the Choctaw Nation, which 
provided ample machinery for the determination of individual 
claims included in this award. The fact that the Mississippi Indians 
did not participate or attempt to participate in that part of the 
award which covered the net proceeds derived from the sale of the 
Choctaw tribal lands in Mississippi is referred to by the court in the 
Amos case as a strong argument against their right to participate 
in the distribution of the tribal property of the Choctaws in the 
Indian Territory. In any event if the Mississi]:)pi Indians have any 
legal or equitable claims against the Choctaw Nation for any part of 
the net proceeds judgment, and we think we have shown that they 
have not, the relief granted them should only be the amount to which 
they were entitled, with interest, and this could only be determined 
by a readjudication of their claims. They would in no case be en- 
titled to citizenship in the Choctaw Nation simply because they had 
failed to get their part of the original judgment. 

We will now proceed to a consideration of more recent legislation 
on this subject. The Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes was 
created by the act of Congress approved March 3, 1893 (27 Stat. L., 



MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 19 

645), for the purpose of treating with tlie several nations in the 
Indian Territory in an endeavor to procure an allotment of the 
lands of the said nations in severalty to the Indians belonging to each 
such nation or tribe, to procure agreements with the tribes for this 
purpose, and to obtain a winding up of the tribal affairs with a view 
to the ultimate creation of the territory embraced by said tribes into 
a State of the Union. 

By the act of June 10, 1896 (29 Stat. L., 321), the commission was 
authorized and directed to hear and determine the applications of 
all persons who might apply to them for citizenship in any of the 
said nations, and in passing on said applications was instructed to 
give due force and effect to the rolls, usages, and customs of the 
tribe in which the applicant claimed citizenship. An appeal was 
provided for from a decision of the commission on these applications 
to the United States courts in Indian Territory. Under this legis- 
lation the commission received and passed on several thousand ap- 
plications, among which was that of the Jack Amos Band of Missis- 
sippi Choctaws, and out of the commission's decision in their case 
arose the decision of the United States court in the case of Jack 
Amos et al. v. The Choctaw Nation, which has heretofore been re- 
ferred to, and in which the court held that Mississippi Choctaw 
Indians were not entitled to citizenship in the Choctaw Nation or 
to participate in the distribution of the tribal property of the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Indians unless they removed and took up their resi- 
dence within the boundaries of said nation. 

The first mention of the Mississippi Choctaws in this enrollment 
legislation is found in the act of June T. 1897 (30 Stat. L., 83), in 
which appears the following: 

Thnt the commission appointed to nearotinte with the Five Civilized Tribes 
in tlie Indian Territory slial! examine and report to Congress whether the Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws nnder their treaties are not entitled to all the rights of Choc- 
taw citizenship, except an interest in the Choctaw annuities. 

Under this provision of law the commission proceeded to the State 
of Mississippi and thoroughlv investigated the riglits of this class of 
Indians, and under date of January 28. 1898, submitted a report to 
Congress wherein the whole question was discussed and the follow- 
ing finding was made: 

It follows, therefore, from this reasoning, as well as from the historical re- 
view already recited, that the nature of the title itself, as well as all stipula- 
tions concerning it in the treaties between the United States and the Choctaw 
Nation. Ihat to avail himself of the "privileges of a Choctaw citizen" any 
person claiming to be a descendant of those Choctaws who were provided for 
in the fotirteenth article of the treaty of 1S.30 must first show the fact that he 
is such descendant and has in good faith joined his brethren in the Territory 
with the intent to become one of the citizens of the nation. Having done so, 
such ix'rson has a right to be enrolled as a Choctaw citizen and to claim all the 
privileges of such a citizen, except to a share in the annuities. And that other- 
wise he can not claim as a right the " privilege of a Choctaw citizen." 

Under the act of June 28. 1898 (30 Stat. L., 495), Avhich is known 
as the Curtis Act, the commission was authorized— 

To determine the identity of Choctaw Indians claiming rights in the Choctaw 
lands under article 14 of the treaty between the United States and the Choctaw 
Nation concluded September 27. IS-^.O, and to that end may administer oaths, 
exanune witnesses, and perform all other acts necessary thereto, and make 
report to the Secretary of the Interior. 



20 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

Tliis act provided for the enrollment of the citizens and freed- 
men entitled to allotment in the Five Civilized Tribes. But it will 
be noted that no anthority Avas given for the enrollment of the Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws, the commission being directed to determine the 
identity of such Indians claiming rights under the treaty. This act 
also provided that no person should be enrolled as entitled to an 
allotment in any of the five tribes unless he had in good faith removed 
to and settled within the Nation, in which he claimed citizenship, on 
or before the date of the approval of said act. But a proviso was in- 
serted that this provision should not be construed as militating 
against any rights or privileges Avhich the Mississippi Choctaws 
might have under the laws or treaties of the tribes. 

Under this authority the commission again proceeded to Missis- 
sippi, and numerous hearings were had in that State and the States 
of Alabama and Louisiana. These hearings were well advertised, 
and an o]iportunity Avas given to everyone who claimed any right as 
a Mississippi Choctaw Indian to appear before the commission and 
assert his claim. Under this laAV a list was made up of Indians 
claiming rights under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830. 
This list contained the names of 1,923 persons, and has been desig- 
nated the McKennon roll. But it must be borne in mind that this 
was not a roll of citizenship, but was prepared under the authority 
contained in the act of June 28, 1898, which only authorized the com- 
mission to determine the identity of ChoctaAv Indians claiming rights 
under the treaty of 1830. 

The next legislation on this subject is found in the act of Mav 31. 
1900 (31 Stat. L., 221), which is as folloAvs: 

That any Mississippi Choctaw duly identifiod as such by the United States 
Commission to the Five Civilized Triljes shall have the right, at any time prior 
to the ai)proval of the final rolls of the Choctaws and Chickasaws hy the Secre- 
tary of the Interior, to make settlement within the Choctaw-Chieknsaw country, 
and, on proof of the fact of bona fide settlement, may be enrolled by the said 
United States conunission and by the Secretary of the Interior as Choctaws 
entitled to allotment: Provided further, That all contracts or agreements look- 
ing to the sale or incumbrance in any way of the lands to be allotted to said 
Mississippi Choctaws shall be null and void. 

lender this law the commission continued to receive and consider 
the applications of Mississippi Choctaw Indians. 

The next legislation on the subject is found in the act of July 1, 
1902 (Stat. J J., 641), Avhich is known as the supplemental agreement 
between the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations and the United States. 
It was found in the previous investigation of the commission that 
many of the Choctaw Indians residing in jVIississippi were full 
bloods, and through ignorance and lack of information as to their 
family history Avere unable to prove that they Avere descendants of 
persons Avho had complied or attempted to comply Avith article 14 
of the treaty of 1830. Accordingly, Avhen the supplemental agree- 
ment Avas draAvn up, a rule of evidence Avas established in favor of 
these persons to the effect that all full-blood ChoctaAv Indians should 
be deemed to be Mississippi ChoctaAvs entitled- to the benefits of 
.said article, and proof of the fact that they Avere full bloods was all 
that Avas required of them in order to entitle them to the indentifica- 
lion. 

It has been charged in the hearings had on the matter that a 
mixed-blood applicant Avas compelled undei- the act to prove that he 



MEMOEIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 21 

or his ancestor had complied with the provisions of the 14th article, 
and as only 143 heads of families had received patents most of the 
applicants were cut off from identification by reason of this require- 
ment. This charge is not true. In the identification of applicants 
under the acts of June 28, 1898, and July 1, 1902, proof that the ap- 
jDlicant was a descendant of one of the scripees, of whom we have 
shown there were more than 4,000,' was sufficient to entitle an appli- 
cant to identification, and any other proofs which the applicant could 
submit tending to show that his ancestor had attempted to comply 
with the 14th article was received and considered in the adjudication 
of his case. (See Appendix No. 7.) 

The report of the Commissioner to the Five Civilized Tribes for 
the year ending June 30, 1907, shows on page 12 that 24,634 persons 
applied to the commission for identification as Mississippi Choctaws 
under the act of June 28, 1898, and of July 1, 1902. Applications 
were received from all over the United States, and the record made 
up in these cases shows that in the large majority of the same the 
prsons were basing their right to enrollment simply on the fact that 
they had some Indian blood in their veins, in most cases the amount 
claimed being very small. Every opportunity was given to the ap- 
plicants to prove their claim. These records, which are now on file 
in the Department of the Interior, are the most voluminous of all 
the enrollment records passed upon by the commission and the de- 
partment, and in many cases rehearings were granted two or three 
limes, and the decisions were held open for a period of four or five 
years, in order to give the applicants every opportunity to prove their 
contention. 

Under this legislation the total number identified was 2,534, and 
by the terms of the act of July 1, 1902, a copy of which is hereto at- 
tached, marked "Appendix No. 6," the persons so identified were given 
six months after the notice of identification within which to remove 
to the Indian Territory. Many of the Indians so identified were full 
bloods and did not have the means or inclination to remove them- 
selves. Accordingly, by the act of Congress approved March 3, 
1903, there was appropriated the sum of $20,000 to assist in the 
removal of these Indians to Indian Territory and their subsistance 
after removal. Two hundred and ninety full-blood Indians were 
removed at the expense of the Government under this appropriation, 
and many hundreds of others either removed at their own expense 
or were removed by others and filed on allotments. One thousand 
and seventy-two persons who were identified failed to remove to 
Indian Territory, or, if they removed, returned to their former 
homes without submitting proof of their removal and settlement 
within the time required by law. Several reasons may be assigned 
for the failure of these persons to take advantage of their indentifica- 
tion. The commissioner in his report states some of these reasons 
as follows : 

First. That many of them did not appreciate the value of allot- 
ment in the Choctaw-Chickasaw country; 

Second. That some of them were very poor and had no uieans for 
transportation; 

Third. Tliat some of them who had removed became sick and died 
during the first winter after I'cmoval, and 



22 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

Fourth. That those who survived advised their friends and rela- 
tives in Mississippi and Alabama of their experiences, Avhich dis- 
couraged them in making- attempt at removing. 

As a matter of fact, most of the persons who failed to remove were 
full bloods, and would not remove at the present time if given an 
opportunity to do so. One of the writers of this brief has had occa- 
sion to visit the fuII-blood Indians remaining in Central Mississippi 
and Louisiana on several occasions. He found them poor, but con- 
tented with their lot. In conversation with them it Avas stated by 
them in man}'^ cases that if the}' had to remove to Oklahoma in order 
to get allotments they did not care to have them, as they preferred 
the home of their fathers to the new land in the West. It was also 
ascertained from conversation with intelligent planters in the vicin- 
ity in which these Indians live, that the white inhabitants of Mis- 
sissippi and Louisiana discourage the removal of the Indians as 
much as possible, as the Indians constitute the most satisfactory 
labor which the white men can find in these States. Many of those 
noAv in Mississippi have gone to Indian Territory and, after staying 
a short time, returned voluntarily to their former homes. These have 
reported to those who have not emigrated and all are satisfied to re- 
main where they are. If they were removed to Oklahoma, and we 
do not understand how anyone can contend that they are rightfully 
entitled to share in the lands of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
without removing, their action would probably be similar to the 
action of other bodies of Indians who have removed to Oklahoma 
from time to time, and just as soon as they were able to get enough 
money to do so, they would return to their homes in the East. This 
disposition of the Mississippi Choctaw Indians is well exemplified 
in the report of the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, sub- 
mitted to the vSecretary of the Interior under date of March 10, 1899. 

A portion of that report is as follows : 

The Choctaw soverniuent in Indian Territory made repeated efforts to 
secure the removal of the ^lissi^^sipiji Choctaws to the Choctaw country, the 
last effort in this direction occurring in 1891, when the National Council of the 
Choctaw Nation, hy act approved October 20, 1S91, generously made an appro- 
priation for the purpose of paying the expenses of certain Choctaw families 
therein named, and providing for the appointment of two commissioners to 
proceed to the State of Mississippi to collect said families and conduct them to 
the Choctaw country. Said connnissioners performed tliis duty and a number 
of families removed to Indian Territory and remained there until after the 
payment of the "leased district" money, when, as we are informed, they re- 
turned to the State of Mississippi. 

It will be impossible to force these Indians to remove to Oklahoma, 
and if it were possible or practicable there would be no way of keep- 
ing them there, and as soon as they were able to do so, they would 
sell or abandon their allotments and return to their haunts in the 
East. 

Sentimentalists may deplore the condition of these Indians, but 
it is doubtful whether their lot would be as desirable or happy from 
their standpoint if they were removed from their present environ- 
ments. The Mississippi Choctaw Indian, by reason of long separa- 
tion from the Indians of the West, has come to be a class by himself. 
These Indians present as distinct characteristics and difference from 
the Choctaw Indians in Oklahoma as though they were members of 
an entirely different tribe. In traveling through Oklahoma the Mis- 



MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AISTD CHICKASAW NATIONS. 23 

sissippi Choctaw can always be distinguished from the descendants 
of the early emigrants. In Oklahoma they adopt the same manner 
of living as they at present have in Mississippi, that is, they remain 
in an isolated state, huddled together in small bands, making no effort 
to associate with or become a part of the Choctaw citizenship of the 
West. 

The First Assistant Secretary of the Interior, on July 2, 1912, sub- 
mitted a report to the chairman of the Committee on Indian" Affairs 
of the House of Representatives, in which the Mississippi Choctaw 
question is discussed at length. In that report he refers to the bill 
imder discussion and states : 

I am advised that if the worlv of reinvestigating and readjudicating the 
claims of Mississippi Chootaws he undertal^en along the broad lines outlined in 
the hill introduced by Mr. Harrison, the work can not be accomplished within 
the time prescribed therein ; that if the applicants are required to establish 
that they or some one of their ancestors were beneficiaries under article 14 
of the treaty of 1830, a vast amount of evidence will necessarily have to be 
taken covering the family history of the applicants for more than 80 years; 
and that this work would be a repetition of work which has already been 
accomplished and in the great ma.iority of cases would be of no benefit what 
ever to the applicants. 

He further says in said report: 

With respect to the 1,070 persons who were identified as Mississippi Choctaws, 
but who failed to prove the facts of removal and settlement in the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw country, it may be said that, irrespective of their unfortunate 
condition of poverty and ignorance, there is grave question whether there is 
.iust ground, legal or equitable, for holding the Choctaw and Chickasaw Na- 
tions responsible for (his failure to comply with the law. In fact, it may be 
urged by the tribes that responsibility, if any, rested upon the United States 
instead. 

After fulh' going into the question from all standpoints, the Sec- 
retary concludes with the following: 

In view of the facts stated above, I am of the opinion that the bill should not 
be enacted into law. 

As stated by the Secretary, this bill provides for a general reopen- 
ing of this whole subject, and the readjudication under an identical 
law of the rights of these parties. As a matter of fact, many per- 
sons who were entitled to iclentification under the act of July 1, 1902, 
would be wholly unable to prove their claim under the provisions of 
the Harrison bill, and we can conceive of no case which would re- 
ceive favorable consideration under the Harrison bill but what would 
have received a favorable decision, upon the submission of proper 
proof, under the former enrollment acts. The only difference is 
that the enrollment acts required the removal to and settlement within 
the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, which the Harrison bill does not 
require. 

IVe believe that a careful consideration of the foregoing argument 
and citations will convince any fair-minded man that the Mississippi 
Choctaw Indian has been given every opportunity under the several 
laws and treaties to obtain a share of the tribal jn'operty of the Choc- 
taw and Chickasaw Nations; that the Choctaws and Chickasaws 
liave always been willing to meet these Indians more than half way, 
and that these two tribes have done all in their power to obtain the 
affiliation of their absentee brothers with them. However, if this 
argument has not succeeded in entirely convincing the Members of 



24 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

Coiifrress, there is one other phase of the matter which has not here- 
tofore been touched upon, but which absolutely settles the whole con- 
trovers}^ 

The treaty of 1830 was entered into between the Choctaw Indians 
and the United States more than 82 years ago. So far as we know, 
no one of the beneficiaries of the fourteenth article of this treaty is 
still alive. The last clause of that article, under which this claim 
arose, is as follows: 

Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of ii Choctaw 
citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be eu'itled to any portion of the 
Choctaw annuity. 

We contend and we believe that an analysis of this article will 
bear out this contention: That the rights guaranteed the Choctaws 
taking advantage of the fourteenth article were personal rights. 
Those identical Choctaws who desired to remain in the States and 
become citizens of them were permitted to do so by complying Avith 
certain provisions therein set forth, and upon doing so were entitled 
to reservations in Mississippi, and the further right was given to such 
persons to remove to the Choctaw Nation west and become citizens 
of said nation, with all the rights of citizenship, except to share in 
the annuities. No word appears in said article granting any rights 
or benefits to the descendants of the fourteenth-article beneficiaries. 

The purpose of the removal of the nation to the west has been 
clearly shown. It Avas intended to remove all of the Indians out 
of the States, so that conflicts betAveen the United States and the 
States Avould not arise oA'er the government of the Indian country. 
The Indians Avould not agree to the treaty until provision Avas made 
for those Avho desired to remain and become citizens of the States, 
but an asylum Avas provided for those Avho remained, provided they 
should ever find conditions too hard for them in the States. They 
could reaffiliate themselves Avith the ChoctaAv Nation and again be- 
come citizens of that nation Avith all the privileges of citizenship, 
except a share of the annuities. But it is inconsistent Avith the Avhole 
theory of removal of these Indians to the west to construe article 
14 as holding out the right of removal perpetually. 

When the scheme of the allotment of lands and distributions of 
tribal property Avas taken up, it became necessary to make rolls of 
citizenship. Of necessity some period had to be fixed for the closing 
of these rolls. Before "the act of July 1, 1902, Avas assented to by 
the tribes, it was insisted that a clause be incorporated providing 
that the rolls of citizenship be closed. The Avork of enrollment had 
been going on since the passage of the act of June 10, 1806, and a 
comprehensive scheme Avas provided by the act of Jidy 1, 1902. for 
the reception of the applications of any persons Avho have not sub- 
mitted their application under the former act, and for the final com- 
pletion of the rolls. 

After thus taking every precaution to see that ample opportunity 
had been given CA^ery one desiring to submit an application for 
enrollment there was inserted in this act the f olloAving provision : 

Sec. 35. No person whose name does not appear upon the rolls as herein pro- 
vided shall be entitled to in any manner participate in the distribution of the 
common property of the Choctaw and Chicksaw Tribes, and those whose names 
appear therooi^ shall participate in the manner set forth in this agreement. 



MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 25 

This provision was one of the inducements held out to the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Indians to obtain their assent to the preparation of 
the rolls of citizenship of their tribes by the United States and the 
scheme for the allotment of their lands in severalty and the gradual 
incorporation of their domain and citizens into a State of the Union. 

By this agreement no new applications for the identification of 
persons as Mississippi Choctaws could be received after six months 
after the ratification of the agreement. This gave to the Mississippi 
Choctaws until March 25, 1903, within which to submit their appli- 
cations for identification, which was three months more time than 
was granted to any other class of applicants for citizenship. Ap- 
pointments were made b}'- the commission for hearings in Mississippi 
and Louisiana for the purpose of receiving any belated applications 
during the six months provided by this last act, but nearly all of 
the Mississippi Choctaw applications had already been submitted 
under the former law. 

Evidence was received in the cases already presented until the 
closing of the rolls, and they were all decided under the law set 
forth in the Gift case (Appendix No. 7), which permitted the identi- 
fication of the descendants of scripees. Congress fixed the period 
for the closing of the rolls as March 4, 1907, thus giving Mississippi 
Choctaws a period of 11 years after the first enrollment work was 
started within which to prove their claims and make settlement 
within the Choctaw-Chickasaw country. 

It is true that descendants of fourteenth-article beneficiaries have 
been from time to time in large numbers admitted to citizenship in 
the Choctaw Nation upon their removal to and settlement within the 
boundaries of said nation, and it is also true that in the treaty of 
July 1, 1902, the right of full citizenship upon removal was granted 
by the tribe for a definite time to these persons, but there is no war- 
rant of law or merit in the contention that the Choctaw Indians yet 
in Mississippi, who did not avail themselves of the benefits granted 
by the agreement of July 1, 1902, are as a matter of right now enti- 
tled to a share in the distribution of the property belonging to the 
Choctaw Nation in the West. 

Even admitting that the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830 
meant all that is claimed for it by the proponents of this bill, the 
rights of these claimants would be barred by the provisions of the 
act of Congress of July 1, 1902. That Congress had the right to pro- 
vide hoAv the rolls of citizens should be made up and how citizen- 
ship should be determined is too well settled now to permit of serious 
contradiction. The mere expectation of a share in the tribal lands 
and moneys of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes is not a vested 
property right. The Supreme Court, in the case of Stephens v. 
Cherokee Nation (174 U. S., 445-488), uses the following language: 

But in .any aspect wo are of opinion tliat the constitutionality of tliese acts in 
respect of tlie deterniination of citizenslii]) can not be successfully assailed on 
the ground f)f the inii)airuiont or destruction of vested rights. The lands and 
moneys of these tribes are public lands and public moneys, and are not held in 
individual ownership, and the assertion by any particular ai)plicant tliat his 
right 1 herein is so vested as to preclude inquiry into his status involves a con- 
tradiction in terms. 

Congress, in providing for the preparation of rolls upon whicli the 
tribal property was to be distributed, gave ample time to every ap- 



26 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

plicant to siilimit his case. It also made residence in the tribe or 
removal thereto within a definite time a prerequisite to citizenship 
and provided that applications must be submitted within a specified 
time and that the rolls be closed on a definite date. The time during 
which the rolls were in preparation extended over a period of 11 
years, and it was provided that " no person whose name does not 
apj)ear upon the rolls as herein provided shall be entitled to in any 
manner participate in the distribution of the common property of the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes." 

That this legislation is a proper exercise of the power of Congress 
over the Indians is shown by a number of decisions of the Supreme 
Court. (See Choctaw Nation r. United States, 119 U. S.,1; Stephens 
r. Cherokee Nation, 174 U. S.. 445 ; Cherokee Nation v. Hitchcock. 
187 U. S.. 294; Lonewolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U. S., 553; Wallace v. 
Adams. 204 U. S., 415; Gritts v. Fisher, 224 U. S.. 640.) 

The Choctaws and Chickasaws have always been ready to deal 
with great liberality toward their absentee brothers. During all the 
time that they maintained their own governments they have stood 
with open arms to welcome these absentees into their midst. But we 
do not know of any single case in all the history of these tribes where 
anyone has been considered or found entitled to citizenship or to any 
of the benefits arising therefrom without taking up his residence in 
the Choctaw-Chickasaw country and showing his desire to affiliate 
with them. All of the Mississippi Choctaw legislation since 1896, 
when the United States took over the control of the affairs of these 
two tribes, has been purely in the nature of a gratuity, except in rare 
instances where one of the original fourteenth-article beneficiaries 
might have applied, and we do not feel that after our affairs were 
administered by the United States for a period of 11 years and rolls 
of citizenship were made and the allotments have all been completed 
that the Clioctaw and Chickasaw Indians should be called upon to do 
anything further toward this class of Indians. 

if there is any relief which the United States desires to give 
thom. we will not be heard in any wa}^ to object, provided the United 
States furnishes this relief from its own land and funds, for we do 
not believe that any benefits which can be given by Congress to 
any Indians can repay the debt which our Government owes in 
general to the North American Indian. If there were any wrongs 
done the Choctaw Indians under the treaty of 1830, and history 
,^hows that there Avere many and flagrant wrongs perpetrated, they 
Avere not done by one Indian against another or one class of Indians 
against another, but were done by the Government of the United 
States or its officers. If these people, then, j^et remaining in Mis- 
sissippi are entitled to any relief, it is not the part of justice to right 
one wrong hy committing another, and the Congress of the United 
States can not in good conscience repay any debt owed to the Mis- 
sissippi Choctaw Indians by forcing the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Indians, who breasted a wilderness and suffered untold hardships 
in fonquoring that Avilderness and making possible the rich and 
populous State of Oklahoma, to share the comparatively small 
rewards of their labor and suft'ering with the Mississippi Indians, 
who took so little interest in the struggle a?^d hardships of their 
brothers in tlio West as not even to be willing to move there after the 



MEMOEIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS, 27 

wilderness was overcome and assist in the maintenance of the tribal 
governments. 

If this legislation is enacted into law, it will mean a delay in the 
final winding up of the aifairs of these two tribes of at least five 
years; it will necessitate the reception and consideration of thousands 
of applications of persons whose cases have already been thoroughly 
adjudicated or who had an opportunity to have them adjudicated 
under former acts; and it will be another case of violated treaty 
obligations with these two tribes, of which history shows too many 
alread}', and will be an act of oppression and injustice visited upon 
them such as we can not believe Congress Avill seriously consider 
when all the facts in the case are placed Ijefore it. 

We therefore ask for careful consideration of the facts and argu- 
ments herein set forth and request that the bill under consideration 
receive unfavorable action. 
Respectfully submitted. 

Victor M. Locke, Jr., 
Principal Chief of the Choctaiu Nation. 
By P. J. Hurley, 
National Attorney for the Choctaw Nation. 
Douglas H. Johnston, 
Governor of the Chickasaw Nation. 
By Geo. D. Rogers, 
National Attorney for the Chichasaw Nation. 



Appendix No. 1. 

CiiAP. XXXIX. An act for the appointment of commissioners to adjust the chiims to 
reservations of land under the fourteenth article of the treaty of eighteen hundred and 
thirty with the Choctaw Indians. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of Amei'iea in Congress assembled, That tliore shall he appointed by the 
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, three commis- 
sioners whose duty it shall be to meet in the State of Mississippi at such time 
and place, as the President shall appoint and designate, and there proceed to 
ascertain the name of every Choctaw Indian who was the head of an Indian 
family at the date of the treaty at Dancing Rabbit Creelv, who has not already 
obtained a reservation under said treaty, and who can show by satisfactory 
evidence that he or she complied or offered to comply with all the requisites 
of the fourteenth article of said treaty, to entitle Iiim or her to a reservation 
under said article; and also the number and names of all the unmarried chil- 
dren of such heads of families who formed a part of the family and were over 
ten years of age, and likewise tlie number and names of the children of such 
heads of families as were under ten years of age, and report to the President, 
to be by him laid before Congress, all the names of such Indians, and the' dif- 
ferent sections of land to which such heads of families were respectively enti- 
tled, together with the opinions of the commissioners, and whether any part of 
said lands have been sold by the Government, and the proofs applicable to 
each case. 

Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That before entering upon their duties 
each of said connnissioners shall, before some judge or justice of the peace, 
take an oath faithfully to discharge the duties inuiosed by this act. 

Sec. 3. A7id be it further enacted, That said commissioners are hereby au- 
thorized to appoint a secretary, whose duty it shall be to record correctly all 
the proceedings of said board and faithfully preserve the snme as well as all 
depositions and other papers fded before said board, and who shall take an 
oath to discharge the duties imposed on him by this act. 



28 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

Sec. 4. And he it further enacted, That u])on the request of the commis- 
sioners it shall be the duty of the district attorney of the State of Mississippi 
to attend said board and give liis assistance in procuring tlie attendance of wit- 
nesses, and Ills aid and advice in their examination, the better to enable the 
commissioners to ascertain the facts correctly in each case. 

Sec. 5. And he it further enacted, That each of said commissioners shall 
receive, while in the discharge of the duties hereby imposed, a salary at the 
rate of three thousand dollars per annum, the secretary a salary at the rate of 
fifteen liundred dollars per annum, and the district attorney a salary at the 
rate of two thousand dollars per annum, to be paid quarterly out of any money 
in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated. 

Sec. G. And he it further enacted, Tliat said commissioners shall have full 
power to summon and cause to come before them such witnesses as they may 
deem necessary, and to have them examined on oath, and if any witness shall 
testify falsely, with an intention to mislead said connnissioners, such witness 
shall be guilty of wilful and corrupt perjury, and shall upon conviction before 
any jurisdiction having cognizance thereof sulTer the punishment by law in- 
flicted on those guilty of that offence. 

Sec. 7. And he it further enacted, That nothing contained in this act shall be 
so convStrued as to sanction what is called contingent locations which have 
been made by George ^I. Martin for tlie benetit of such Indians as were sup- 
posed to have been entitled to other lands which liave been sold by the United 
States, such contingent locations having been made without any legal authority, 
it being the true intend of this act to reserve to Congress tlie power of doing 
that which may ai>pear just when a correct knowledge of all the facts is 
obtained. 

Sec. 8. And he it further enacted. That this act shall be in force to the first 
day of March, eighteen hundred and thirty-eight, next, and no longer. 

Approved, March 3, 1S:57 (5 Stat. L., 180). 



Chap. XIII. An act to amend an act entitled " .\n act for the appointment of commis- 
sioners to adjust the claims to reservations of land under tlie fourteenth article of the 
treaty of eigliteen liundred and thirty with the Choctaw Indians." 

Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Reprcsentatircs of the United States 
of America in Conyress assemhied, That the commissioners provided for in the 
act hereby amended, or a majority of tliem, shall have full power and autliority 
to adjourn their sessions to such place or places, within the State of Missis- 
sippi, as in their judgment the interest of the Government and of the claimants 
may require such sessions to be held. 

Sec. 2. And he it further enacted. That in the case of the death, resignation, 
or absence of any one of the said commissioners the remaining two commission- 
ers shall have full power and authority to proceed and execute the powers 
given by this act or the act hereby amended. 

Sec 3. And he it further enacted, That the said connnissioners shall have all 
the powers of a court of record for the purpose of compelling the attendance of 
witnesses, administering oaths, touching matters depending before them, pre- 
serving order, aiul punishing contemiUs; an<l shall have power to make all 
needful rules for the regulation of the proceedings before them, as well as to 
employ one or more interpreters, and one or more agents to collect testimony 
for the United States. 

Sec. 4. And he it further enacted. That for defraying the contingent expenses 
of the said commission the sum of five thousand dollars be, and the same is 
hereby, appropriated out of any money in the Treasui'y not otherwise appro- 
priated. 

Sec 5. And he it further enacted, That the said act shall be and remain in 
force until the first day of August next. 

Sec G. And he it further enacted, hy the authority aforesaid. That the com- 
pen.sation to be made to the district attorney for his services shall be equal to 
the compensation allowed to a commissioner under the act hereby amended. 

Sec 7. And he it further enacted. That nothing contained in this act. or the 
act which this is intended to amend, shall be so const ruetl as to embrace the 
claim of any Indian or head of a Choctaw family who has removed west of the 
Mississippi I\ivei". 

Sec. 8. And he it further enacted. That if it shall be proved to the satisfaction 
of said commissioners that any claimant has attempted, or shall attempt, to 



MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 29 

substitute the child of any other Iiulinii as and for his own, or lias attempted 
or shall attempt, by his testimony, to substitute for the child of any other 
claimant the child of another Indian, the name of such claimant so attempting 
to make such snbstitntion shall be stricken from the list of claimants. 
Approved, February 22, 1838 (5 Stat. L., 211). 



Appendix No. 2. 

Chap. CLXXXVII. An act to provide for the satisfaction of claims arising under tlie 
fourteenth and nineteenth articles of the treatv of Dancing Uabbit Creek, concluded in 
September, one thousand eight hundred and thirty. 

Be it enacted l)y the Henate (nut House of Represeutatii-es of the United States 
of America in Congress asscnthled, That the act approved ou the third- of March, 
eighteen hundred and thirty-seven, entitled "An act for the appointment of 
commissioners to adjust the claims to reservations of land under the fourteenth 
article of the treaty of eighteen hundred and thirty, with the Choctaw In- 
dians; and also the act approved on the twenty-second day of February, 
eighteen hundred and thirty-eight, entitled "An act to amend an act entitled 
'An act for the appointment of commissioners to adjust the claims to reserva- 
tions of land under the fourteenth article of the treaty of eighteen hundred and 
thirty, with the Choctaw Indians,' so far as the same are not repealed or 
modified by the provisions of this act," be, and the same are hereby, revived 
and continued in force until the powers conferred by this act shall be fully 
executed, subject, nevertheless, to repeal or modification by any act of Con- 
gress. And all the powers and duties of the commissioners are hereby ex- 
tended to claims arising under the nineteenth article of the said treaty, and 
under the supplement to the said treaty, to be examined in the same manner 
and with the same effect as in cases arising under the fourteenth article of 
the said treaty: Provided, That the salary of said commissioners shall not 
exceetl the rate of two thousand five hundred dollars per annum. 

vSkc. 2, And he it further enacted. That subpoenas for the attemlance of wit- 
nesses before the said commissioners, and process to compel such attendance 
may be issued by the said commissioners, or any two of them, under their seals 
in the same manner and with the same effect as if issued by courts of record, 
and may be executed by the marshal of any district, or by any sheriff, deputy 
sheriff, or other peace officer designated by the said commissioners, who shall 
receive for such services the same fees as are allow^ed in the district court 
of the United States for the district in which the same shall be rendered for 
similar services, to be paid, on the certificate of the commissioners, out of 
the contingent fund appropriated by the fourth section of the act secondly 
above recited, which was approved on the twenty-second day of February, 
one thousand eight hundred and thirty-eight, and which is revived by this act : 
Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to revive such por- 
tion of the act approved the third day of March, one thousand eight hundred 
and thirty-seven, referred to in the first section of this act, as iirovides for 
the eniiiloyment and pay of the district attorney of either of the districts of 
the State of Mississippi. 

Skc. .">. And he it further e)iacted,Th:\t when the said commissioners shall have 
ascertained that any Choctaw has (■omi)lied or offered to comply witli all the 
requisites of the fourteenth article of the said treaty to entitle him to any res- 
ervation under that article, which requisites are as follows, to wit: That said 
Choctaw Indian did signify his or her intention to the agent in person, or by 
some person duly authorized and especially directetl by said Indian to signify 
the intention of said Indian to become a citizen of the State, within six months 
from the date of the ratification of the said treaty, and had his or her name, 
within the time of six months aforesaid, enrolled on the register of the Indian 
agent aforesaid for that purpose; or shall prove to the entire satisfaction of 
the said coinniission(M-s and t<» the Secretary of War that he or she did signify 
his or her intention, witlnn the term of six months from the date of the ratifi- 
cation of the treaty ;iforesaid, if his or lier name was not enrolled in the reg- 
ister of tlie agent aforesaid, lint was omitted by said agent; and, secondly, that 
snid Indian did, at the dale of making said treaty, to wit, on the twenty-seventh 
day of Seiit('ml)er, eighteen Inmdi'ed and thirty, have and own an improvement 
in tlie then (Choctaw country; and that having and owning an iini)rovenient at 
the place and time aforesaid did reside upon that identical improvement, or a 



30 MEMOKIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AXD CHICKASAW XATIOXS. 

part of it, for the term of five years coiitiiuiously next after tlie ratification of 
said treaty, to wit. from the twenty-fourth of Fehrnary, eiiihteen hundred and 
thirty-one, to the twenty-fourth of February, eisjliteen hundred and thirty-six, 
unless it shall he made to appear that such im]trovement was, before the twenty- 
fourth day of February, ei.shteen hundred and thirty-six, disposed of by the 
United States, and that the reservee was dispossessed by means of such disposi- 
tion: and, thirdly, that it shall be made to appear to the entire satisfaction of 
said conmiissioners and to the Secretary of War that said Indian did not receive 
any other grant of land under the provisions of any other article of said treaty; 
and, fourthly, that it shall be made to appear in like manner that said Indian 
did not remove to the Choctaw country west of the Mississippi liiver, but he or 
she had continued to reside within the limits of the country ceded by the Choc- 
taw Indians to the United States by said treaty of twenty-seventh September, 
in the year eighteen hundred and thirty, it shall be the duty of said commis- 
sioners, if all and each of the above requisites shall be made clearly to appear 
to their satisfaction and the Secretary of War shall concur therein, to proceed 
to ascertain the quantity of land to which said Indian, by virtue of the four- 
teenth article of said treaty, is entitled to, which, when ascertaineJ, shall be 
located for .said Indian, according to sectional lines, so as to embrace the im- 
provement, or a part of it. owned by said Indian at the date of said treaty; and 
it shall be the duty of the President of the United States to issue a patent to 
said Indian for said laud if he or she be living, and if not to his or her heirs 
and legal representatives; and in like manner shall the commissioners afore- 
said ascertain the quantity of laud granted by said article to each child of 
said Indian, according to the limitations contained in said article, and locate 
said quantity for said children contiguous to and adjoining the improvement 
of the parent of such child or children ; and the President shall issue a patent 
for each tract of laud thus located to said Indian child if living, and if not to 
the heirs and legal representatives of such Indian child. But if the United 
States shall have disposed of any tract of land to which any Indian was entitled 
under the provisions of said fourteenth article of said treaty, so that it is now 
impossible to give said Indian the quantity to which he is entitled, including 
his improvements, as aforesaid, or any part of it, or to his children on the ad- 
joining lands, the said commissioners shall thereupon estimate the quantity to 
which each Indian is entitled and allow him or her for the same a quantity of 
laud equal to that allowed, to be taken out of any of the public lands in the 
States of Mississippi, Louisiana, Alabama, and Arkansas, subject to enti'y at 
private sale: and certificates to that effect shall be delivered, under the direc- 
tion of the Secretary of War, through such agent as he may select, not more 
than one-half of which shall be delivered to said Indian until after his removal 
to the Choctaw territory west of the Mississippi River. The said commissioners 
shall also ascertain the Choctaws, if any, who relinquished or offered to relin- 
quish any reservations to which he was entitled under the nineteenth article 
of the said treat5', or whose reservations under that article had been sold by 
the Unitefl States; and shall also determine the quantity to which such claim- 
ant was entitled, and the quantity of land which should be allowed him on ex- 
tinguishment of such claim at the rate of two-fifths of an acre for every acre 
of the land to which said claimant was entitled, said laud having been esti- 
mated under this article at fifty cents per acre: Provided, ncrerthcles>i, Ttiat no 
claim shall be considered or allowed by said commissioners for or in the name 
or behalf of any Indian claimant whose name does not appear upon the lists or 
registers of claimants made by Major Armstrong, special agent for that purpose, 
in conjunction with the three chiefs of the three Choctaw districts, and returned 
to the Department of War in January, eighteen hundred and thirty-two. and 
who does not appear from those registers to be entitled to a reservation under 
said nineteenth article. 

Sec. 4. And he il further enaeted. That the said commissioners, within two 
years from the time of tlieir entering ui)on the duties of their ofhces. and as 
often as shall be required by the President of the United States, shall report 
to him their proceediugs in the iiremises, with a full and perfect list of names 
of all the Chocta.ws whom they shall have determined to be entitled to reserva- 
tions under this act: the quantity of land to which each shall be so entitled, 
the number of claims which can be located according to the provisions of the 
fourth section of this act, and such as cannot be located according to the pro- 
visions of the fourth section of this act; and the powers and duties of the 



MEMOEIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 31 

saifl couimissioiiers shall cease at the expiration of two years from the time 
of the first organization of the board: and their proceedings may he terminated 
by the President at any time previous to the expiration of tlie said two years. 

Sec. 5. And he it further enacted. That the commissioners to be appointed 
under this act shall also ascertain and determine the quantity of land to which 
any Choctaw or other person named in the supplement to the said treaty of 
Dancing Ilabbit Creek was entitled by virtue thereof, and which such person 
has by any means been prevented from receiving. 

Sec. 6. And be it furtlter enacted. That if the President of the United States 
shall approve and confirm the determination of the commissioners heretofore 
appointed to investigate the claims existing under the fourteenth article of the 
said treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek, in any case, he shall cause to be delivered 
to the claimant, if he be a Choctaw Indian, his legal representatives or heirs, 
certificates, as provided by the fourth section of this act, for the quantity of land 
to which such claimant shall appear, by such determination, to have been en- 
titled., in full satisfaction and discharge of such claim : Provided, Such determi- 
nation was made by adhering, in every instance, to the requisites contained in 
the fourth section of this act: And provided, also, That said claims, nor either 
of them, cannot now be located, according to the provisions of the fourth section 
of this act. 

Sec. 7. And he it further enacted, That distinct accounts shall be kept of the 
certificates issued in satisfaction of the claims provided for by this act. and of 
?11 expenses attending the execution of the same; and the amount thereof shall 
be retained and withheld from any distribution to the States. 

Sec. 8. And he it further enacted. That notliing in this act contained shall be 
so construed as to autliorize the said commissioners to adjudicate any claim 
which may be presented by a white man who may have had, or now has, an 
Indian wife or family: and any patent to land which shall issue on any Indian 
claim under the provisions of the treaty aforesaid shall be issued to tlie Indian 
to whom the claim is allowed if living, and if dead to his or her heirs and legal 
representatives, any act of Congress or usage or custom to the contrary not- 
withstanding. 

Sec. 9. And he it further enacted. That no claim shall be allowed under the 
fourteenth article of said treaty if the said commissioners shall be satisfied by 
such proof as they may prescribe that said claim had been, previous to the 
expiration of five years from the ratification of said treaty, assigned, either 
in whole or in part: and in case of a partial assignment or agreement for an 
assignment thereof the same shall be allowed so far only as the original Indian 
claimant was at that date the bona fide proprietor thereof. 

Sec. 10. And he it further enacted. That all claims under either of the articles 
of said treatj' mentioned above, or the supplemental articles thereof, which 
shall not be "duly presented to said commissioners for allowance within one 
year after the final passage of this act shall be thereafter forever barred. 

Approved, August 23, 1842 (5 Stat. L., 513). 



Appendix No. 3. 

Act of Congress approvi^^l March .", 184,5 (5 Slat. L., 777 1. 

That of the scrip which has been awarded or which shall be awarded to 
Choctaw Indians under the provisions of the law of twenty-third August, one 
thousand eight hundred and forty-two, that portion thereof not deliverable 
East by the third section of said law in these words, "not more than one-half 
of which shiill be delivered to said Indian until after his removal to the Choc- 
taw territory, west of the Mississippi River." shall not be issued or delivered 
in the Wcf-t, but the amounts aw.-irded for land on which they resided, but 
which it is impossible for the I'nited States now to give them, shall carry an 
interest of five i)er cent, which the Unitefl States will pay annually to the 
reservees under the treaty of one thousand eight hundred and thirty, resiiec- 
tively, or to their heirs and legal representatives forever, estimating the land 
to which they may be entitled at one dollar and twenty-five cents per acre: 
Provided further. That so nnich of the law of twenty-third August, cue thousand 
eight hundre<l and forty-two, as is inconsistent l.'erewitli is hereby repealed. 



32 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 
Act of Congress approved July 21, 1852 (10 Stat. L., 19). 

For the interest on the amoinit awarded Choctaw chiiniants uiider the four- 
teenth article of the treaty of Dancinsi Kahhil Creelc. of twenty-seventh of 
September, ei.ijliteen hundred and thirty, for lands on which they resided, but 
which it is impossible to jjjive them, and in lieu of the scrip that has been 
awarded under the act of twenty-third of August, eighteen hundred and forty- 
two, not deliverable east, by the third section of said law, per act of third 
of March, eighteen hundred and forty-five, for the half year ending thirtieth 
of June, eighteen hundretl and fifty-two, twenty-one thousand eight hundred 
dollars: ProvMed, That after the thirtieth day of June, eighteen hundre<l and 
fifty-two, all payments of interest on said awards shall cease, and that the 
Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, directed to pay said claimants 
the amount of principal awarded in each case, respecti\ely, and that the amount 
necessary for this purpose be. and the same is hereby, appropriated, not exceed- 
ing eight hundred aud seventy-two thousand dollars: Provided further. That 
the final payment and satisfaction of said awards shall be first ratified and 
approved as a final release of all claims of such parties under the fourteenth 
ai'ticle of said treaty, by the proper national authority of the Choctaws, in such 
form as shall be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. 



Act of Congress approved August :iO, 1852 (10 Stat. L., 42). 

That the Secretary of the Interior be. and he hereby is, authorized to examine 
the reservation claims of the Choctaws known as Bay Indians and of those 
Choctaws in whose cases the scrip awarded by the late board of commissioners 
has not been issued ; and where he shall find that such Indians are clearly 
entitled to land under the fourteenth article of the treaty of eighteen hundred 
and thirty, and under the several acts heretofore passed in relation to such 
claims, he is hereby authorized to extend to such claimants the provisions 
applicable to such claims iu the acts of twenty-third August, eighteen hundred 
and forty-two, and of third March, eighteen hundred and forty-five. 



Act of Congress approved March 3, 1853 (10 Stat. L., 227). 

That the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to examine the claims of 
Choctaws to reservations of land under the treaty of eighteen hundred and 
thirty shall extend to all cases recommended by either of the boards of com- 
missioners appointed to examine said claims, and his awards in scrip shall be 
received by them in full satisfaction of their claims aganst the Government 
arsing under said treaty, and the scrip thus awarded shall be received as other 
warrants in payment for anj- public lands subject to sale at private entry. 



Appendix No. 4. 

LAWS PASSED BY THE GENERAL COUNCIL OF THE CHOCTAW NATION AT ITS REGULAR 
SESSION COMMENCING OCTOBER C, 1S90. 

No. 16. 

An act recognizing certain persons as citizens of tliis n.ation. 

Be it enacted hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation assemhied. That 
Sandos Amos, his wife Ann. and William Amos, and Solomon Wilson and wife 
and their four children, all full-blood Choctaws and lately come to this nation 
from Mississippi, be, and they are hereby, recognized as citizens of the 



MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AXD CHICKASAW NATIONS. 33 

Cliocraw Nation, and entitletl to all the i-iglits. iji-ivileires. and innnunilies of 
citizens, and this act sball take effect and lie in force from and after its 
passage. 

Appro\ed. Oct. 20. 1890. 

W. N. Jones, 
Princiiwl Chief of tlic Choctaw Nntion. 

No. 17. 

An act conferring i-itiz(-nship (in certain persons named. 

Be it enacted hy the General Council of the Choctaw 'Nation asscmhled. That 
Sexton Auios. Mat Sukke. Amos Bell, Jimson Bell, John Alusion, Sarah Wilson, 
Isaac Wilson. Mary Wilson. Eve Wilson. Horace Wilson. Thomas Barney, Isaac 
Simpson, ;ind Timi Yark. all late of the State of Mississippi, are hereby recog- 
nized as citizens of this nation and entitled to all the rights, privileges, and 
innnnnities of citizens of this nation, and this act shall take effect and be in 
force from and after its passage. 

Apiiroved, Oct. 80. lS;f»0. 

W. N. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaio Nation. 

No. 2o. 

.vn act c'onferring citize-.^ship on ^Irs. Trohern and other Mississippi Clioctaws. 

Be it enacted hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation assembled, That 
Mrs. Trehern and her children. Joel Trehern. Joseph Trehern, Laura (Trehera) 
Walker, her husband Sam Walker and two children, Hannah (Trehern) 
l)eloach. her husband Joseiih Deloach and their three children, all late of the 
State of Mississippi, be. and are hereby. recognize<l as citizeis of the Choctaw 
Nation and entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of citizens of 
(his nation, and this act shall take effect and be in force from and after its 
passage. 

Approved, Oct. 31. isfxi. 

W. N. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

No. 48. 

.\n act reeognizinir the citizenship of Willis .Tackson and his family. 

Be it enacted ty the General Council of the Choctaw Nation afisernhled. That 
Willis Jackson, his wife Mary Jackson a:id their children Minnie, Sam, Folsoni, 
Laura, and Edmond Jackson, late of the State of Mississippi, are hereby rec- 
I g'-iized and declared to be citizens of this nation and entitled to all the rights, 
pi'ivileges. and immunities of other citizens of this nation, and this act shall take 
effect and lie in force from and after its passage. 
.Vp]irnved. Nov. L8. ISOO. 

AV. N. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

So. 44. 

An act m;il;in.!.': :iiii>ro!iriatio!i for tl:<' relief of Matt Sakki et al. 

He it enacted hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation a.s.'<enil)led. That 
(lie srm <tf seventy-five dollars is hereby ajiproiiriated. out of any money in the 
treasury not otlierwis*^ aiipropriated. for the jiurpose of aiding Matt Sakki, 
Isac Simsin, and T*>m Yark. lately arrived from Mississippi, and to e:iable 
them to iiay their board and traveling expeises while attending the general 
con !cil tor the purpose of having themselves recognized as citizens of this 
iKition. an<l this act shall take effect aid be in force from and after its ]iassaga 
Ai)pr<.ve<1. Nov. 14. ISIJO. 

W. N. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 
M'f.T." ':; :; 



34 MEMORIAL OV THE CHOCTAW AXD CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

LiAW.S I'ASS! U BY THE (jJKNERAL COUNCIL OF Till: ClIOLTAW NaIIOX \J IIS SrKClAI. 

Session ConvilNed ox Apkil (iTu, isitl. 
No. 2. 

An act for the roliof of certain Mississippi Clioctaws. 

!}(■ it ciKiclcd hi/ the General Council of the Choctaic Nation n-ssrnihlfd, That 
die sum of two hundrod aiul ninety-five flollnrs is hereby appropriatod out of 
any money in tlie treasury not otherwise appropriated to reimburse Cornelius 
Jlickman and family (4). Presley Isham and family (4). Nat Sakki ill, Dixon 
Itil)!ey (1), Taylor Bell (1), Jane Sakki (1). Lee Nobliee (1), Tom Sakki and 
family (o), James Sakki (1). Alex Sakki (1), Isaac Simpson and family (5), 
and Matt Sakki and family (3), Clioctaws (late arrivals from the State of Mis- 
sissip])i) for their expenditures while immitira'tinic. and to enable them to 
obtain the necessaries of life, they having arrived too late last year to raise 
a cro]> of any kind; and this act shall take eti'ect and be in force from and after 
its passage. 

Approved, April 4, 1891. 

W. X. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

No. 8. 
An act admitting certain Mississippi Indians to citizenship. 

Be it ennrted hy the General Council of the Choctair Nation aasenihled. Thai 
Mrs. Anna Boyd, Mrs. Lenas Southerland, Mrs. Ozie Travis, Mrs. M. William, 
Choctaws lately from the State of Mississippi, and full sister of C. A. Bilbo, 
who has been heretofore admitted, and their de.scendants lie, and they arc 
hereby, declared citizens of the Choctaw Nation. 

Be it further enacted that this act talce effect and be in force from a. id after 
its passage. 

Approved, April 8. ISDL 

W. N. JOXKS. 

I'rinciiial Chief of tin Clioetmr Nation. 
No. l.j. 
An act admitting certain Choclaws from Mississippi to citizensliip in the Choctaw Nation. 

Be it enacted hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation a.-<semhled. That 
Joe Willis and his cliildren, Nancy Selan. and Frank Willis and his sister Liney 
Willis, and I^illy Willis and his children I>ee and Serena Willis. Thomson Bar- 
nett, J:;mes Snkki and Thomas Sakki. and Wallace Sam and his wife Fannie 
Sam and their children Milley, Jeruzy. Luke, Silley, Lizzie, Liza, and Era Sam. 
all liaving just come from the old nation in Mississippi, are hereby admitted to 
all of the rights and ])rivileges of citizenshii) in the Choctaw Nation, and this 
act shall take effect and be in force from and after its pass.-igi'. 

Ai.i.roved, April 8, 1891. 

W. N. JONKS. 
I'rincijtdl Chief of the Clioctui'- Naiion. 

No. 10. 

.\n act reco^nizinir tlic citiz(>nship of certain Mississippi Choctaws. 

Be it enacted hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation a.^.-!(nihled. That 
following Mississipjii Choctaws. late arrival, to wit: 1. Cornelius Hickman; 
2, Klizi .' im Hickman; 8, Jeff Ilickinan; 4, Presley Isham: 5, Ellen Isham: 
('., William Isham; 7, Nat Sakki: 8, Dixon Uii)ley; 9, Taylor Bell; 10. Alex 
Sakki: 11, Jane Sakki: 12, Lee Nobbe; 13, Henson Haltenstyle; 14, Phoebe Hal- 
tcnstyle; 1.^), Milton Haltenstyle: Hi. Jesse Haltenstyle; 17. Fall Haltenstyle. 
are hereby recognized .-is citiztMis of this nation and are entitled to all the 
rights and privileges ami immunities of other citizens of this natii>n; and this 
act take ef-ect and be in force fi em and after its passage. 

Ajiproved. April 9, 1891. 

W. N. Jones. 
I'rinciiini Cliiif of the Choctaic Nation. 



MEMOKIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 35 

No. 17. 

An acl for the rrlirt' of certain Mississippi Clioctaws. ' 

fiv it enacted hy the Oeneral CoiineU of the Choetaic Ndtioit (is.se in bled, That 
tlu> sum of $300 be. and the same is hereby, appropriated out of any money in 
the treasury, not otherwise aiipropriated, as a relief for tlie following late 
arrivals from Mississippi, to wit: 1. Joe Willis; 2, Nancy Willis; 3, Frank 
Willis; 4. Taney Willis; .j, Billy Willis; 6. Liza Willis; 7. Serena Willis; 8, 
Thompson Kurney; 9, Wallace Sam; 10. Fannie Sam; 11. Jenizy Sam; 12. 
Luke Sam ; 13, Sally Sam ; 14, Liza Sam ; 15. Lizzie Sam ; IG, Asa Sam ; 17, 
Henson Haltenstyle; IS. Phoebe Haltenstyle; 1!). Milton Haltenstyle; 20, Jesse 
Haltenstyle; 21, Fall Haltenstyle; 22. Sanders Amos; 23, William Amos; 24, 
Ann Amos; 25, John Amos; 2(i. Solomon Amos; 27, Puss Amos; 2S, Cassou 
Wilson; 29. Belson Wilson; 30, Mednrial Wilson; and this act to take effect and 
be in force from and after its passage. 

Approved, April 9. 1891. 

W. N. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Clioetan- Xatioii. 



Laws Passed ry the (tEnkrai. Council of the Choctaw Nation at Its 
ItEGULAR Session Convened in October. 1891. 

No. 14. 

An act for the relief of twenty-six Chottaws lately from Mississii>pi. 

Be it enacted by the (leneral ('(HineU of the Clioetan- Nation assembled. 
Section 1. That the sum of two hundred and sixty dollars is hereby appro- 
priated for the relief of James Phillips and twenty-five others, whose names 
are heretoto attached; that the national auditor sh: 11 issue his warrant on the 
treasurer and he shall pay the same. 

Sec. 2. That this act take effect and be in force from and after its passage. 

Approved, October 21, 1891. 

W. X. Jones, 
Priiicitial Chief of the Choctair Xation. 

No. 27. 

An act conferrin'4- citizenship on Henry Lewis. Mississippi Choctaw. 

lie it enacted by tlie (lenera! Council of the Choctair Nation assembled. That 
one Uein-y Lewis, late of the State of Mississippi, is hereby recognized as a 
citizen of this nation, and eiditled to all the rights, privileges, and imnuinities 
of a citizen of this nation, and this act shall take effect and be in force from 
and after its passage. 

Approved, October 27, 1S9L 

W. N. Jones, 
Prineiyal Chief of the Choctaw Xation. 

No. 13. 

Au act in n^lation to the appointing comnussioners to remove tlie Choctav.s from t'n' 

St'.te of Mississippi. 

Section 1. Be it enacted bij the (leneral Council of the Choctair Xatinn 
assembled. That there is hereby appro])riated. out of any money in the national 
treasury n<»t otherwise ajipropriated, and i)laced in the hands of connnissioners 
(to be "ai»pointed by the principal chief), the sum of seventeen InrnlrcMl an<t 
iiinely-two dollars and titty cents ($L792.50) upon the certificate of tlie prin- 
cip:>!"cl!i(>f to the national auditor, then the auditor shall issue his wiM-rant to 
tli(> iidional treasurer, and the national treasurei- shall pay the sanu^ for the 
l>ur]i(-se of paying the expenses of the following-named Clu)ctaws wlio now re- 
si('r> i'l the State of ;Mississi|ipi ; that is. 

Wesley Williams and in family. liufus York and in family. Ch.irley York 
and 5 in f-mily. Tim York and 2 in family. Samps^ou York anil 3 in family. 



36 MEMORIAL OP THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

Oixoii York ;uh1 <» in family. Scott Hiiruie and 3 in family. Ttobert Anderson 
and 4 in family. Kdmond ^Farrin and .'5 in family. Ben Sakke and 8 in family, 
John Sakke and ."» in family. William Cnltio and 5 in fanuly, Martin Worlai'k 
jind 8 in family, Dixon Willis and 4 in family. Tom Cheto and 11 in family, Tom 
Davis and 7 in family. James Battiest iuid 1 in family, Davis Welch and 4 in 
family. Sakkee Snsan and 7 in family. Sis Simm and 3 in family. Jack Columbus 
and 2 in family, Thomas Benton and 3 in family. Willie and 4 in family, W. E. 
Martin ami 4 in family, Joe Yale and 3 in family. Billy Gipsou and 1 m family, 
Thomiison Bakei- and I in family, making in all one hundred and fourteen 
persons. 

Skc. 2. fU it finilicr oiarfcd. That the princiiml chief shall ainioint two com- 
juissioners. who shall i)i'oceed at once to the State of Mississippi, collect up 
said Choctaws. and bring them to this nation. Said commissionei's to be a])- 
pointed and commissioned Ity the principal chief and to take the required oath 
of office bef(n'e any judge of a court of record of this nation, and to give bond, 
payable to the i»rincipal chief, to he approved b,t the said .indge. in the sum of 
seventeen hundred and ninety-two dollars and fifty cents (1.702.50) for the 
faithful j)erformance of their duties, and that the sum of eight hundred dollars 
(800) is hereby api)ropriated, out of any money in the national treasury not 
otherwise appropriated, to said conunissioners. and upon presenting their com- 
mission to the national anditoi- he shall diaw his warrant on tlie treasury for 
tlie sum of eight hundretl dollars in favor of said commissioners, and the 
national treasurer shall pay the same. 

Skc. 3. Be it further rnaetcd. That the said eight hundred dollars- ($800) — 
that is, $400 each to said commissioners — shall be in full compensation for their 
service as such conunissioners. 

Skc. 4. Be it fiirtlirr enacted. Tliat^ sai<l commissioners shall make a full re- 
port of tb.eir actiims to the next genei-al council at its next regular term in 
Oct.. 1802. and to return any balance of money on hand to the national treas- 
tirer; pud this act shall take effect and be in force from an<l after its passage. 

Ann-oved October 20. i801. 

J. n. Bryant. 
Act ill f! I'riiieiiKil Chief af the Choetdir Nation. 



I^AWS OF THE (iKNKRAI. COUNCIL OF THE ChOCTAW NATION PASSED AT ITS IlEGrXAR 

Session in the Years 189o and 180G. 

Bill Xo. 2. 
Resolution in reuard to citizenship eases. 

Section 1. Be it resolved hi/ the (lenernl Coiiiicil of the Choctaiv yation as- 
xemhled. That all ])arties who claim citizenship to the ChoctaAV Nation, and 
intend lU'oving the same, are hereby notified that they must file tlieir petitions, 
as the law directs, on or before November Iftth, lSOr». as after said date no peti- 
tions will" be entertained by tlie Choctaw Nation, and all ])arties wlio have their 
petitions filed are hereby notified that they must come forward and prosecute 
the same at once. 

Sec. 2. Be it further resolved. That the national secretary is liereby requested 
to I'.ave this resolution printed in all the principal jiapers in the ('hoctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations, and that the sheriffs of each county are hereby notified to 
jiost this resolntion in conspicuous places in their respective counties. 

Approved, (tctolier IC. A. D. ISO."). 

Jeff Gardner, 
Briiicipdl CJnif af the Choctiiir Nation. 

P.ii I. Xo. ."i. 
An ael reeojrni/.uij; the citizensliip of eertain Mississippi Clioetaws. 

B( if I nailed In/ th'' (leiieral CokikH of tlie ('hoctaiv Xatioii assenittliil. That 
Ihe following Mississiitpi Choctaws. late arvivals. to wit. Wm. Child. Mary 
Child. Martin Child, and Emil Child. Leslci' Jackson. Wilson .lackson. George 
Jackson. Joe T,ewis. .\niv Jackson, are herebv recognized as citizens of this 



MEMOEIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW JSTATIONS. 37 

nation, and are entithnl to all tlie rights, privileges, and innnunilies uf other 
citizens of this nation: and iliis act ta Ice' effect and be in force from and after 
its i)assago. 

Approved. Octol)er 1(3. 1895. 

Jeff Gardner. 
Priii(ip((l Chief of the ClKictnir Xniioii. 

Bill No. 22. 

An act admittiua' certain Choctaws from Louisiana to citizensliip. 

Section 1. Be it enacted by the Gencrnl Council of the Choctair Xdtion (is- 
fcniltled. That Jim Jackson. Emma Jaclcson. William Mnrjjhy. .Martin .Jackson, 
Fannie Jackson. Mary Jackson. Jim Jackson, jr.. Sophy Jackson. Frank Jack- 
son. P.ankston Johnson, and John Dorsett are hereby admitted to all the rights 
and privileges of citizenship in the Choctaw Nation, and that this act shall take 
effect and be in force from and after its iiassage. 
Approved. Or-tober 28. 189o. 

Jeff Gardner. 
rrinciiKii Chief of tlie Choctuir Xation. 

Bill No. m. 

An nrt admiitinu: cerlain ('!iii(t:n\ s frcm ?dississii)i)i to citizensliip in tin' ('liortaw Xation. 

}{e it enacted hy the GeneraJ Coioieil of the CJtoctaii: Nation asseniljled. That 
Sarah Whittle and her children, to wit: Arcolah W'hittle. age 22: Nnpoleon 
Whittle, age 18; Carrie Whittle, age 1(>; John Whittle, age 14: Arthnr Whittle, 
age 11; Alma Whittle, age 7: Madge Lamar Whittle, age "i : and Clarence 
Whittle, age 3, are hei'eby admitted to all the rights, privileges, and innnnnities 
of citizenship in the Choi-taw Nation, and this act take effect an 1 be in force 
from and after its passage. 

Approved, November 5. 18'.t."). 

Jeff ({ardneu, 
Prineipal Chief of the CJi'xidir Xation. 

' Bill No. 38. 

A'l act adniitlins' Itctty A. Lewis and others. 

Section 1. Be it enacted hi/ the Ceneral Council of the Choctair Xation a-s- 
i!<enif)lcd. Thitt Betty A. Lewis and her children, to wit. Frank Lewi.s age 10: 
Bettie Lewis, age 14; May Lewis, age 10; Annie, age 8; Cora, age 6 years; 
Cnrti.s age 4 years; Alice, age 2 years; Winnie, age G months, are hereby 
admittetr to till the rights, privileges, and immunities of other Choctaws. and 
tiiis act take effect and l)e in force from and after its passage. 

Approved. November (i. lS!)."i. 

Jeff (Jaruner. 
J'rineiiial Chief of the Choctatv Xation. 

Bill No. 4:!. 
.\n act adniirtinu- Hilly li.ikrr and oll'.er Mississip])! Indians to citizensiiiii. 

Section 1. Be it enacted Jiii the (Icneral Council of the Choctair Xation n.<t- 
aemtiled, Tliat Billy Baker, his children, Oscar Baker, age 1") years; Annie 
Baker, age 10 years"; Sally Baker, age 7 years; and Solomon John, age 22 years; 
Susan Jolni. age 19 yetirs; Sissy John, age 13 years; and llickiiKin Lewis, age 
27, all late arrivals from Mississii)i)i. be and they are hereiiy ;idmitt('d to all 
the rights .and privil(>ges in said .Xiition. of oth<>r Cluwtaws. 

Sec. 2. Be it further enacted, That this act take effect and Ix' in force from 
and after its passage. 

Approved. November 8, 189.J. 

Jeff (Jaruner. 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 



38 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

RiLi. No. 44. 

All net admitting Louis Trahpon and his cliildiin to citizf-iisliiii. 

SiX'Tiox L lie it rnactcfl hii the General Cokih-H of tlic Choctdir Xation as- 
sembled, Tli;)t Louis Traheon and his cliildicii. Willie May Tralieon. age 2 
years: F. Tralieon. ajie months, be adniitled to all the rifihts. privilejios. and 
innniinities with other Choctaws. and that this act take effect and be in fin'ee 
from an<l after its passage 
ApjirovciL November 9. 1S95. 

Jkff Gakdnkr. 
Princiital Chief of the Choctair Xation. 

ItiLL No. 't'2. 

An act adniittin.n- :\Intti(' ]'.a-,i;('tl -.wmI cliildrcn. 

Skction L {{(' it enaetcd hii the (leneral VouncU of the CJtoetair Xation as- 
semhled. That Mattie Raggett and her children. Willie Raggett, age 5: (iracy 
Raggett, age ti; and Ida Jane Raggett, age U months, be admitted to the 
rights and jirivileges of citizenship oft other Choctaws. and that this act take 
effect and l)e in force from and after its passage. 
ApprovecL November 11, 1895. 

Jeff Gardner, 
I'riHciiKil ciiiif of the Choctaw Nation. 



Appendix No. 5. 

An act intillfd "An a<'( (ictiniriii tlir duties and powirs of tlic coininissioncrs. tlie iurisdic- 
lioii <if tlic court of cl.airns, fixing their pay. and foi- other purposes." 

Section 1. lie it enacted hi/ tlie (leneral Coiineil of the Choctair Xation. That 
where;>s the Senate of the Ignited States has awarded to the Choctaws the net 
proceeds of the land ceded by them to the United States by the treaty of Dancing 
Rabbit Creek. September, A. D. 1S30, deducting therefrom the proper exjiendi- 
tnres for surveying, selling, &e. 

Sec. 2. fie it further enacted. That whereas the Choctaws. by the 12th article 
of the treaty of June 22d. isnr). .acci'])ted the same in full s;ttisfactlon of national 
and indivi(bial claims, thereby becoming liable and asstnning tlie payment of 
individual claimants. 

Sec. ;>. Be it further enacted. That the thrf>e cummissioners now appointed 
luider ('»th section of the constitution and two others to be appointed by the 
governor, who, after being commissioned and cpialitied according to law, shall 
be. and the same are hereby, constituted a court of claims, who. before entering 
upon the duties of their office, shall take the oath of office prescribed in the 
constitution, which oath may be administered by the governor or ,iu<lge of any 
court of record. 

Sec. 4. lie it further enacted. That the court of cljiinis shall have jurisdiction 
over all claims for self-enugration. all claims under the 14th and I9th articles 
of the treaty of September, 1S30, and also claimants under the supidement, 
claims for lost property in emigi-ating to this nation during the years IS-'Jl, 2, 
and 3, :'nd for projierty scheduled to the General Government agents. 

Sec. 5. Be •it further enacted, That all claims against the nation shall be 
brought within IS months from and after the passage of this act, and not thei'e- 
after. Claimants shall have the right to appear before said court of claims 
in proper i>erson or by attorney: provided, that none shall be attorneys except 
those legally qualified to ])ractic(> before the courts of this nation, being citizens" 
thereof. 

Sec. <;. lie it further enacted. That said court of claims shall, as well as 
claimants, have the p«wer to sunnnon any person or persons as witnesses on 
the part of the nation, and in case the personal attendance of the summoned 
can not be had depositions may be taken by either party before any judge or 
other officer legally qualified to administer an oath, sufficient notice being given 
to the adverse party of the time and place of taking the same. 

Sec. 7. Be it further enacted. That the court of claims shall choose from 
among themselves the presiding commissioner, who shall be styled the chief 



MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 39 

coiuiuissioner. and enter the same on the minutes of the court, and said eliief 
commissioner shall have power to sign the minutes and certify any matter of 
fact of record in said court. 

Sec. 8. Be it furthtr eiKictcd. That the court of claims shall have power to 
appoint a clerk, by and with the advice of the governor, to hold his ofBce as 
long as business may require, but may be removed for any good and sutlicient 
cause from office. Said clerk shall take the oath of office prescribetl in the 
constitution before any judge of a court of record, and shall be allowed for his 
services three dollars per day, payable quarterly out of the national treasury 
l.y certified certiiicate from under the hand and seal of the chief commissioner 
of the court. 

Sec. 9. B- it further enacted. That for preventing errors in entering upon the 
Judgment or orders of said court the minutes of the proceetlings every day- 
shall be drawn up by the clerk before the next day's sitting of the court, when 
the same shall be read in open court and such corrections as may be necessary 
made and then signed by the chief commissioner of the court, and carefully 
jireserved in a well-bound book to be kept for the purpose, if necessary, of 
making a pro rata payment on adjudicated claims of judgment rendered, and 
the last day of each sitting of said court the proceedings of the day shall be 
drawn up. read, correc-ted. and signe<l on the same day as aforesaid. 

Sec. 10. Be it further eiiaeted, That the commissioners shall for their services 
receive three dollars for every day they shall be actually engaged in the dis- 
charge of their duties as commissioners, i>ayable quarterly out of any funds in 
the National Treasury not otherwise appropriated — a certificate, tinder the hand 
;uid seal of the chief commissioner, of the number of days and the amount shall 
be presented to the Auditor, who shall issue his warrant on the National Treas- 
urer for the same. 

And he it further enacted. That the witness or witnesses appearing in behalf 
of the nation in the court of claims will be allowed two cents per mile and fifty 
cents iier day in attending the above said court, out of any money in th» 
Treasury not otherwise api)ropriated, on the order or certificate of the chief 
commissioner, to the National Auditor for the same. 

Sec. 11. Be it further enacted. That in case any vacancy shall occur in the 
court of claims, either by death, resignation, or removal from office^^the gov- 
ernor shall have power to fill such vacancy by appointment. 

Sec. 12. Be it further enacted. That in case of necessity the court shall have 
power to ajipoint a bailitf who shall execute all orders of said court and for 
his services shall receive the same as that of constable foi- like services. 

Sec 13. Be it further enacted, That the said court shall hold its session at 
ilie following ]ilaces. to wit: Skullyville, one month, commencing 1st Monday 
in .January, 1800: John Riddle's, two weeks, commencing 1st Monday in Feb- 
iiiary. iscO; Hoggy Depot, commencing third Monday in February, to hold two 
weeks: Mayhew, three weeks, commencing first Monday in March, 1800; 
.Tno. Caffrey's, three weeks, commencing 4th Monday in March, 1860; Doaks- 
ville. one month, commencing third Monday in April, 1860; Lukfatah, one 
month, commencing third Monday in May, 1860: Jessee McKinney's, two weeks, 
commencing third Monday in June, 1860. 

Be it further enacted. That in case the said court of claims shall not com- 
plete the adjudication of claims enrolled within specified times then additional 
terms shall be held by said court; times and place to be fixed by said court for 
final and entire adjudication. 

Approved, October 21, 1859. 



An act makins; distribution of tlio " net proceeds " monev arising under judgment of 
til'' Court of Claims of the United States rendered on tlie IGtli dav of December, 
A. D. 1886. 

Section 1. B< it enacted Inj the (ieneral Council of the Choelaw \ation a><scm- 
hhd. That the Princijial Chief of the Choctaw Nation is hereby authorized to ap- 
|i<iint threi' competent persons as conunissioners. one from each district, by and 
with tlie advice ;ind cinsent of the Senate, who shall be commissioned by the 
lirinciiiai riiiof. nnd before Ihey enter upon the dis<-]iarge of their duties '.sliall 
lake the <i;itli <>f office jirescribed by the const ilution. and tliey shall elect one 
Jiniong tljemselves ciiief commissionei-, and shall aii|)oint a clerk and bailiff, 
and a majority of I lie cnnimissioners shall const Kute a (juorum for the dis 
patch of business. 



40 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AXD CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

Skc. 2. Jic it further enacted. That the duty of these CDinmissioners shall be 
to proceed as soon as ju-actk-ahle to ascertain the leual heirs of the individual 
chiinis that have been adjudicated liy the court of claims of the Choctaw 
Nation nncU'r acts of the (Jenei'al Council approved 1.S72 and May. ISTo. which 
:(d.judicat ion amounted to eijfht hnn(h"(Ml and twenty-five thousand dollars 
($s2.",(i(io.<H)). If no reasonable ohjeclion api)ears. the connnission shall issue 
cei liticates, sijiued by the couunissioners present and attested by the clerk, for 
the amount of such claims to the person entitled thereto. an<l the I'nited 
States Indian aj^ent for the five Civilized Tribes shall pay said certificates 
out of tlie net proceeds money. 

Sf;c. :>. lie it fiirtJier enacted. That the ruited States Indian ayent for the 
Five Civilized Tribes is hereby authorized to make requisitions on the proper 
lUithorities of the TTnited States on behalf of the Choctaw Nation for sufficient 
sums of money to pay the lialnlities of the Choctaw Nation to the individual 
claims that have been adjudicated, or may hereafter be adjudicated, by the 
proper authoi'ities of said Nation, and claims so adjudicated shall be reported 
to the I'nited States Indian aujent for the Five Civilized Tribes by the com- 
mission. The first requisition shall be for eijiht hundred and twenty-five 
thousand dollai's (.$S2r).0(X).0O). to be !)aid to said asient out of the sum of one 
million four hundred aiid thirty-six thousand two hundred and seven and 15/100 
dollars ($].4.'>().207.3r)). balance due tlie Choctaw Nation under jud.itment of 
the Court of Claims of the United States, rendered on the Itjth day of Decem- 
ber. ISSC). for the i)urpose of settling the individual claims that liave been 
adjudicate<l by the court of claims of tlie Choctaw Nation, under acts of the 
General Council ai)proved 1872 and May. 1875. 

Si:c. 4. He if furllier enacted. That said commission, for the better convenience 
of the claimants, shall hold their meetings at the fidlowing places, to wit: In 
the first district at I'oteau Station. Sans Bois court ground, and McAlester. 
(ifteen business days at each place. In the second district at the circuit court 
ground at Sulphiir Springs, Nashoba County, twenty business days, and at 
Lukfatah. in Boktuklo County, ten business days. In the third district at the 
circuit court grounds, in Jackson County, thirty business days, and at String- 
town, in Atoka County, twenty business days, and in order to give every 
claimant an opportunity to ai>pear before said lio.ird the c(!nunission shall 
hold thirty business days at Tushkahomma. which shall be the tin.:il meeting 
of said commission. 

Sec. 5. lie it further enacted. Tliat the clerk shall keeti a fair and correct 
record of the proceedings of the commission, and the bailiff shall serve all 
ordei-s and commands of the commission and keep order during business hours. 
an<l for that puri)ose he is hereby authorize<l to arrest any person for disturb- 
ing any person at the place of meeting, attending to i»usiness or for any other 
purpose, and turn such person over to the sheriff of the county where the 
meeting is held. 

Skc. (>. lie it fiuilier enacted. That said commission slmll. inider no circum- 
stances, inake ailow.-ince to juiy person v.-hose claim has been rejected by the 
revisory board held at Atoka in the year TS7(;. but may. and are hereby reipiired 
to. exanune any new claim that may be presented and. if ju.st. allow the same. 

Sec. 7. lie it' further enacted. That if a vacancy occurs by death or refusal to 
serve the vacancy shall be filled by appointment of the principal chief: the 
princi])al chief shall set the time for the first meeting of the connnission. to be 
held at I'oteau Station. l)y giving fifteen days' notice to the conunissioners, 
and the connnission«>rs shall give fifteen d.-iys' notice before nu'eting ;it each 
pl.-ice of meetiug after the first meeting. 

Skc. S. I{( it furtlier enacted. That said cDiumission shall receive fur their 
services herein the sum of five dollars each per day ;uid mileage ten cents per 
mile actually traveled in going to and from each place of meeting. The clerk 
and bailiir shall receive the same pay as a commissioner. The chief commis- 
sioner shall issue certificate on the national auditor for the pay of the officers 
of the conuuission. and tlie treasurer shall pay the same. 

Sec. 9. lie it further enacted. Tliat said commission shall procure at the 
expense of tl:e Choctaw Nation all stationery necessary to run the business of 
the commission: the chief commissioner sliall i.ss\ie his certificate on the 
national auditor for the amount necessary to pay iuv the stationery, and the 
auditor issue his warrant on the treasurer for the saiin'. 

For the guidance of the commission in examining claims and issuing certifi- 
cates, tlu' principal chief is hereby authorized to immediately procure the roll of 
the individual claimants that appears of record in tlie Interior Deiiartment at 



MEMOEIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AXD CHICKASAV^^ NATIONS. 41 

Washington, D. C. at tbe expense of the Choctaw Nation, payable on the 
certitieate of the princiiial chief on the national auditor, and he shall issue 
his warrant on the treasurer for the same. All expenses incnrred by the 
Choctaw Nation on account of the (\)urt of Claims shall be refunded out of 
the net proceeds money after individual claims are paid. 

Si:c. 11. He it furthrr citdctaJ. That th(> national secretary is hereby directed 
to furnish a certitied copy of this act, one to the Coinmissioner of Indian Affairs, 
one to the Secretary of the Interior, and one to the United States Indian agent 
for the Five Civilized Tribes: and all acts coming in conflict with this act are 
liereby repealed, and this act shall take effect and l)e in force fi-om and after its 
nassage. 

Apjn'oved. Nov. ('>. isss. 

B. F. Smallvvood. 
I'l-iiicipii! Chief of the Choetaw Natian. 

This is to certify that the above and foregoing (pages Nos. 1-5) is a true and 
[•direct copy from the original a<-t now on file in this office. 

Witness 'my hand and the seal of the Choctaw Nation this November 26. 1888. 

A. Telle. 
Xiitioiidl Secretary Choctaiv Nalion. 



Appendix No. 0. 

SUPPLEMENTAL AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND T£iK CHOCTAW AND 
CHICKASAW NATIONS AI'PROVID BY ACT OF CONOBESS OF JULY 1, l',)02 (32 STAT. L.. 
P. 641). 

MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAWS. 

41. All persons duly identified by the conunission to the Five Civilized Tribes' 
under the provisions of section 21 of the act of Congress approved .June 28, 1898 
(.^>() Stats., 495), as Mississippi Choctaws entitled to benefits under article 14 of 
the treaty between the I'nited States and the Choctaw Nation, concluded Sep- 
tember 27, 1830. may. at any time within six months after the date of their 
identification as Mississipjii Choctaws by the rtiid commission, make bona fide 
settlement within the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, .and upon proof of such set- 
tlement to such commission within one year after the date of their sjiid identi- 
fication as Mih'sissiiipi Choctaws shall be enrolled l)y such conunission as Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws entitled to allotment as herein ])rovided for citizens of the 
tribes, sul).1ect to the special provisions herein provide<I as to Mississippi Choc- 
taws, and said enrollment shall be final when approved by tlie Secretary of the 
Interior. The application of no person for identification as a MisHissii)pi Choc- 
taw shall be received by said commission after six mouths subsequent to the 
date of the final ratification of this agreement, and in the disposition of such 
apitlicationsi all full-blood Mississi])i»i Choctaw Indians and tlie descendants of 
any Mississippi Choctaw Indians, whether of full or mixed blood, who receive 
a patent to land tmder the said fourteenth article of the said treaty of eighteen 
Inuidi-ed and thirty who had not move<l to and made bona fide settlement in the 
Clioctaw-Chickasaw country ]irior to .Tune twenty-eighth, eighteen hundred and 
ninety-eight, shall be deemed to be Mississi])pi Choctaws, entitled to benefits 
under article fourteen of the said treaty of Sei)tember twenty-seventh, eighteen 
linndred and thirty, and to identification as such by said commission, but this 
dirrrtion or i)rovision nhall be deemed to be only a rule of evidence and shall not 
i)e invoked by or operate to (he advaidage of any ai)plicant who is not a Mis- 
sissip])! Choctaw of the full blood or who is not the descendant of a Mississippi 
ClKM-taw who received a paten( to land under said treaty, or who is otherwise 
barred from the right of <Mti/.enHliip in the Choctaw Nation. AH of sahl ^lis- 
siss:pj»i Choctaws .so enrolled by said c()nunissiou shall be ui)on a separate roll. 

42. When any such Mississiji])! Choctaw s'liall have in good faith continuouly 
reside<l upon the lands of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations for a period of 
three .vears, inclu<ling his residence tluM-eon before and after such enrollment, 
be shall, upon due proof of such continuousi Ijona fide residence made in such 
manner and before such officer as may be designated by the Secretary of the 
Inteiior, receive a patent for his allotment, as provided in the- Atoka agretMuent, 



42 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

and he shall hold the lands allotted to him as iirovided In th's a.iireenient for 
citizens of the Choctaw and Chickasa\\' Nations. 

43. Applications for enrollment ai-i Mississiiipi Choctaws. and aiiiilications to 
have land set ai)art to them as snch, must he made personally hefore the com- 
nr.ssion to the Five Civilized Tribes. Fathers may apitly for their minor chil- 
dren: and. if the father Ite dead, the mother may a])ply: linsltands may apply 
for wives. Applications for ori)hans, inline persons, and persons of unsound 
mind may Ite made by duly ajipointed jruanlian or curator, and for aged and 
infirm persons and jtrisoners by agents duly authorized thereunto by ])ower of 
attorney, in the discretion of said commission. 

44. If within four years after such enrollment, any such Mississippi Choc- 
taw or his heirs f>r representatives, if he be dead, fails to make proof of such 
continuous bona fide residence for the period so i»rescribed, or up to the time of 
the death of such Miss'issippi Choctaw, in case of his death after enrollment, he 
and his heirs and representatives, if he be dead, shall l>e deeme<l to have ac- 
quired no interest in the lands set apart to him. and the same shall be sold at 
public auction for cash under rules and regulations' prescribed by the Secretary 
of the Interior, and the proceeds paid into the Treasui-y of the T'nited States 
to the credit of the Choctaw and Chiclvasaw Tribes, and distributed per capita 
with other funds of the tribe. Such lands shall not be sold for less than their 
appraised value. Ufion payment of tlie full ]iurchasie price itatent shall issue 
to the purchaser. 



Appendix No. 7. 

November 23, 1904. 
Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, 

Munkogcc. 1 11(1. T. 

(iF:NTLEMF.N : The department is in receipt of your report of June 3, 1904, 
resubmitting tlie record in the matter of the application of Jim Gift, M. C. II. 
1659, et al., for identification as Mississippi Choctaws, rendered in compliance 
with departmental letters of February 25, 1903, and P'ebruary 19, 1904. 

From the testimony furnished by the witnesses in this case it apitears that 
Jim (Tiff, the jirincipal applicant, through whom the others claim, was born in 
Sumter County. Ala., a few years prior to tlie treaty of September 27, 1S30. 
He is of mixed Choctaw and negro blood. His mother was a Choctaw woman 
named Lucy, wlio in early life lived in Greene County, Ala. From there she 
removed to Sumter County, Ala., where the principal applicant was born, and 
thence westward to Kemper County, Miss. In the latter county the principal 
applicant lived until he became an old man. He has lived near T.ockhart, 
Lauderdale Comity, which is the county south of Kemper County, for the last 
12 or 15 years. 

It apiiears from the records of the Indian Office that in 1831 an application 
was made by a Choctaw women named Lucy for the benefits of article 14 of the 
treaty of September 27. 1830. This aiiplicatiou was made at the "old factory" 
in Siimter County, Ala., which was siituated within a few miles of her residence, 
on behalf of herself and her children. No record was kept of her application, 
and subsequently she presented an application in 1843 to the commissioners 
acting under the act of Congress of August 23. 1842 (5 Stats.. 513). As a 
result of this application, scrip was issued to Lucy and to her children, among 
whom was a child iiiimed Jimmy, who wa •; under 10 years of age when the 
treaty was made. 

Out of the facts enumerated two questions arise: Fir.st, Is the testimony 
sufficient Ic identify the api)licant and his mother Lucy with the Jimmy and 
Lucy of record to whom scrip was issuwlV and, second. Is the is-isuance of scrip 
under the act referred to sufficient evidence that the recipients of same com- 
plied or attempteil to comply, in i)erson or otherwise, with the provisions of 
article 14 of the treaty of September 27, 1830V 

From your report of June 3. 1904, and decision of October 10, 1902, it appears 
that you ate of the oiiinion that the testimony of Jim Gift is unreliable and 
that tlie testimony is accordingly insufticieat to identify the applicant as the 
scripee of record. 

Respecting the iioint of law involved, it further appears tliat you are of the 
opinion that secticui 41 of the act of July, 1902 (32 Stats., 641). contains no 
express ijrovision authorizing the identification of scripees and their descend- 
ants. You are, however, for the reasons stated by you, of the opinion that said 



MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS. 43 

section does not oiierate in any respet-t to prevent tbe idenfification of persons 
;is Mis.sissipi)i Choetaws who were entitled to identiticaticai as such prior to said 
.".ct. and that seripees and their descendants, where the facts are sufficient to 
warrant the same, are still entitled to identification. 

The Couiniissioner of Indian Affaii's. in his rejxtrt of December 10. 1902, and 
tlie actintr commissioner, in his report of Novendier 2. 1904, are of the opinion 
that the testimony is sufficient to establish that Jim (Jiff and his mother Lucy 
are the identical Jimmy and Lucy to whom scrip wa>s issued. The actinj? com- 
nn'ssioner .sets forth at considerable length bis reasons for believiui; that the 
testimony of Jim Gift is reliable, and could not possibly be a fabrication. In 
respect to the point of law involved, the acting commissioner is also of the 
opinion that persons entitled to identification before the act of July 1, 1902, 
supra, were not, by virtue of that act. barred from identification. He is of the 
oiiinion. however, that sec-tion 41 thereof is in itself sufficient authority for the 
idenlitication of seripees and their descendants as Mississiiipi Clioctaws. 
Whether the acting commissioner's view as to section 41 is correct or not, the 
".■esult of tills case will be the s;inie. 

The department lias compared the testimony furnished by the applicants 
and their witnesses with the information furnished by the Indian Office, and 
is satisfied that if the testimony is to be accepted as reliable it is sufficient 
to establish the conclusions of the Indian Office as to the questions of fact 
iuAoIved. The testimony connected with the parentage of Jim Gift showing his 
mixture of Afric-ui and CTioctaw blood, his mother's name and her various 
residences, her appearance before the Indian agent at " Yazoo " City, the date of 
her death. Jim Gift's place of birth, and his various places of residence, the 
restiniduy concerning his twin sister and tbe name of his other relatives, agrees 
substantially in so many respects with the testimony of a like character rela- 
tive to the Jinuiiy and Luc.v of recoi'd and the various members of the family 
to which tliey belonged: that the identity (.f Jim (Jiff with said Jinnny of record 
can not be reasonabl.v rpiestioned. 

There remains to be considered the question of law involved relative to tlie 
I'iglits of seripees and their descendants. Concerning said section 41 of the act 
(if July 1. 1902, the Attorney General of the United Slates, in an opinion ren- 
dered June 19, 1903, used the following language: 

"This agreement must, of course, be construed in the light of the circum- 
stances under which it was made, and with a jiurpose to ascertain tlie intention 
of the parties thereto. Manifestly the parties did not intend to abridge the 
rights of any person theretofore entitled by law t(» identification as a Mississippi 
Choctav\-. hut they did intend to perjuit the identification of some persons wlio 
had not prior to that time been able to bring themselves within the requirements 
of the rules established by the commission — persons, the evidence of whose 
rights under the treaty of 1830, could not be secured, but who the Government 
of the Unitetl States and the Choctaw Indians, 'in their generosity.' desired 
should share in the benefits arising out of the provisions of that treaty. * * * 

"In my opinion, paragraph 41 of the agreement of 21st March. 1902. does 
not require the identification of part-blood cliildren of Mississip]ii Choctaws 
them.selves idt>ntified solely by reason i>f full blond. Sm-h children must in 
some other wa.y, if ])ossible, establish tlieir claims to participate in the benefits 
arising from the treaty of 1S30. They have not been deprived by the agreement 
<pf anything to which they wei'e entitled before its conclusion." 

From this ()])in!on it Sc^enis clear tliat if the descendants of seripees were 
entitled to identification as Mississippi Choctaws prior to the ratilication of 
the Clioctaw-Chicka.saw agreement, they are not now barred from such identi- 
fication. The rule in force prior to the ratification of said agreement per- 
mitted the identification of aiM'licants wliosc ancestors complied or atteiniite<l 
to comply, in person or by proxy, with article 14 of the treaty of September 27, 
1830. It is therefore necessary to determine whether seripees and the de- 
sc-c'iidants of seripees come within this rule. Article 14 (»f the treaty of 1830 
states: 

" Each Choctaw hea<l of a family being desirous to reniain and become a 
I itizen of the States shall be permitted to do so by signifying his intention to 
the agent within six months from the ratification of this treay. and he or she 
shall thereupon be entitled to a reservation of one section (if 040 acres of land, 
to be bounde<l by sectional lines of survey; in like manner shall be entitled 
to one-half that quantity for each unmarried child whidi is living witli him 
over 10 years of age, and a quarter section to such cliild as may l>e under 10 
years of age, to a<l.join tlie location of the parent. If they reside upon said 
lands, intending to become citizens of the States, for five years after the 



44 MEMORIAL OF THE CHOCTAW AXD CHICKASAW NATIONS. 

latification of this treaty, in that case a srant in fee simple shall issue; said 
reservation shall include the present improvement of the head of the family 
or a portion of it. Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the 
l)i'ivilege of a ('hcK-tavv citizen, l)ut if they ever remove are not to be entitled 
to any .i)ortion of the Choctaw annuity." 

Owins to the failure of the Government to furnish an agent promptly u])on 
the ratification of the treaty, an<l for the further reascm that said agent, after 
entering upon his duties, was der^^lict in his performance of the same and re- 
fused to enroll many who applieil for the benefits of the treaty, only a mere 
liandful of the persons entitled to such benefits were eurolle<l. To adjust and 
settle the land claims arising under this article Congress subsequently provider! 
conuiiissions to a<ijudicate all such claims, and in the act of August 23, 1S42. 
supra, the commission was specifically instructe<l in section ?, thereof as to 
the requisites constituting sufficient compliance with article 14 of said treaty 
lo entitle those coin])iying therewith to lands guarantee<l by it. Where appli- 
cants establisheil to the satisfaction of the commissioners and the Secretary 
of War that they had complie<l with the requisites specifically enumerated in 
said section .">, patents were to be issued to them covering in whole or in part 
improvements made by them at the date of the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek. 
In cases where it ap[)eared that applicants had done everything within their 
power to comply with the treaty but had failed to maintain continuous resi- 
dence for five years after the ratification of the treaty upon the lands claimed 
liy them, such failure being due to the fact that the Government had before 
the expiration of the five-year period patented said lands to others, a substi- 
tute iirr.-mgement was made whereby their claims were to be settleil by the 
issuance of certificates entitling tliem to select an equal amount of public 
land in the United States open to selection in the States of ^lississippi, Ala- 
bama. Louisiana, and Arkansas, the acceptance of such certificates by the 
;ipplicants to operate as "a full satisfaction and discharge" of their claims 
against the Touted States to land under article 14 of the treaty of ISJjO. 

It will thu>) be seen that patentees and scripees stood on e.x;ictly the same 
footing, so far as the merits of their c.-ises were concerned, but the l.-itter were 
compelled to -icceiJt as the fi'uits of their compliance with the treaty ;i substituted 
perform.-ince on the [)art of the Government, by which they received other lands 
than those which they were promised by the treaty. Can it be held that this 
substituted i)ei'form;ince pro|iosed by the Governn)ent as a settlement of the land 
claims of fourteenth-article applicants and accepted by them in full satisfaction 
of such claims, operates in any respect to alter their claims against the Choc 
taw Nation to a portion of its lands west of the ]Mississi]ii)i, claims founded 
lipon the guaran.ty in said article 14 that " persons who claim under this article 
shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw citizen '"? The department does not 
s(t consider. The only relation existing between patents and scri]) and land 
riglits in the Choctaw Nation is this: So far as the rights of fourteenth-article 
claimants to Choctaw lands west of the Mississippi is concerned, patients and 
scrip serve only as evidence that the persons to whom they wei'e issued elected 
for themselves and for persons claiming through them, not to relintptish their 
rigl ts as Choctaw citizens. excei)t to the amiuities. Other than this the 
acti'.n of the Ignited States in ad.1udicating the claims of these people against 
it for lands under ;irticle 14 has nothing whatever to do with their claims 
against the Choctaw Nation for a sh;ir(» of its lands lying west of the 
Mississii)pi. 

The depjirtment 1s therefm-e of the opinion that scriiiees and tlu'ir (U'si-end- 
ants come within the rule referred to al)ove .as being persons or descendants 
of persons who attempted to comply with article 14 of the treaty of September 
27. 18.30. In this connection it should be noted that it is not the intention of 
the (lei)artnient to hold that this is the only form of attempted conqtliance which 
can be recognized, or that othei' forms of attemiited coini)li:ince will be recog- 
nized. Other r.-ises of ntteniitfed comiilianc(> must be determined as jtresented. 

Yon are accordingly directed, in accoi'dance with the riu-onnnendation of 
the Indian OtHce, lo identify these applicants as ,"\Iississipi)i Choctaws. and lo 
so .advise them .-iud their attorneys. In so doing you are reipiesled to inform 
them respecting the time limit within which they are recpiired to remove to 
the Choctaw N.ition after receiving notice from you. 

A copy of the acting conuius-ioner's letter of November 2. 1'.X)4. is inclosed 
herewith. 

Respectfully, Thos. Ryan, 

Acting Xccrclniii. 

o 



Part Four 



[Copy.] 

The Portland, 
Washington, D. C, June 12, 1913. 
Hon: Franklin K. Lane, 

Secretary of the Interior. 

Dear Sfr: The matter of the reopening of the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw rolls has reached a serious 
condition. As attorne}^ for the Choctaw Nation, I 
find myself somewhat handicapped in the fight to prevent 
the rolls from being reopened by not knowing definitely 
who is behind the movement. 

There are, of course, a great number of attorneys 
who appear before the committees of Congress and 
before your office in these matters but there are definite 
rumors to the effect that these attorneys are not the 
only parties interested. Contracts have been taken from 
a great number of persons who claim to have a right 
to enrollment and, it is rumored, that these contracts 
have been turned into a syndicate and capitalized and 
that the money derived from the sale of the contracts is 
being used to lobby a provision through Congress to 
reopen the rolls. 

There are many other rumors in connection with this 
matter which are not as definite as the one I have stated. 
I have not enough information to make a charge of the 
nature suggested and be able to establish the charge 
after it became public. It would be ruinous to any 
man to make a charge of this nature and not be able to 
substantiate it. For this reason 1 respectfully request 
that you detail an inspector to investigate this matter 
and report the facts relative thereto. 

This is a matter in which your office is deeply inter- 
ested as well as the Indian Tribes. It was under the 
supervision of the Secretary of the Interioi- that the 



rolls of these nations were made and completed. If the 
rolls are thrown open, the Indians will suffer great and 
irreparable injury and we appeal to your office for the 
assistance which the Government owes in the protection 
of the rights of the Indians. 

I will be glad to confer with you on this matter at 
your convenience. We desire your office to assist us 
in ascertaining the facts before a public charge is made. 
If the facts do not warrant it the charge need not be 
made. 

I wish it to be understood, however, that this letter 

is not to be construed to implj' that I think any member 

of Congress or the Senate is financially interested in 

these contracts as I have no information to that effect. 

Very respectfully, 

(Sgd.) P. J. HURLEY, 

National Attorney for the Choctaw N^ation. 



Part Five 



._6 

ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES 
HEARINGS 

BEFORE 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SIXTY-THIRD CONGRESS 
Second Session 

ON 

BILLS FOR ENROLLMENT WITH THE 
FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES 



JULY 2, 1914 






WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OmOE 

19U 



SUBCOMMITTEE. 

CHARLES D. CARTER, Chairman. 
J. D. POST. PHILIP P. CAMPBELL. 

ROBERT P. HILL. CLARENCE B. MILLER. 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



Mr. Carter (interposing). Right along that line, how many con- 
tracts have you with these people ? 

Mr. Cantwell. I have, in all, contracts with 4,200 persons. 

Mr. Carter. What compensation do those contracts provide? 

Mr. Caxtwell. They provide that the fee shall be fixed by act of 
Congress or subject to change by act of Congress and by the Secre- 
tary of the Interior. They provide for from 25 per cent to 35 per 
cent. A part of them provide for 35 per cent. 

Mr. Post. If these 4,000 persons were enrolled as citizens of the 
Choctaw Nation, and if they were entitled to all of the emoluments 
that you claim for them, what would be the aggregate amount com- 
ing to them ? 

Mr. Caxtwell. They are not claiming under this bill the distri- 
butions which were made per capita that they did not go out there 
to be identified for; that is, those cash distributions that were made 
during the time the tribe was in existence of lease money or of the 
net proceeds of them. They are simply equitably entitled to them, 
but they are claiming instead of the lands that those now on the rolls 
have gotten or this bill provides that they shall get a full and equal 
quantity of land at twice the nominal appraised value. That 
amounts, so far as these lands go, to about $2,000 apiece. It would 
amount to an equal distribution if awarded those rights 

Mr. Post (interposing). What do you estimate that to be? 

Mr. Cantwell. The estimates vary. Everyone now on the rolls 
has gotten his 320 acres at a nominal appraisement, and those lands 
are in many cases worth $100 per acre to-day. There would probably 
be. at a low estimate, $25,000,000 or $30,000,000 worth of property 
left; that is, at the very lowest estimate. 

Mr. Carter. I have here what purports to be a copy of a contract, 
printed with the name of Cantwell & Crews on it, which contains 
the following provision : 

Fiftli. To collect ami receive all .sums of money, lands, and property that 
may lawfully be collected, selected, and received by reason of said rights here- 
after, and to faithfully pay over and account to the party of the first part for 
all such sums of money, lands, and property after deducting (he compensation 
herein jirovidcd for. 

******* 

Mr. Carter. I notice here an affidavit by A. P. Powell, in which 
he sets out, I believe, that he has taken, through Milton J. Turner, 
Robert L. Fortune, and others, contracts for about 2,300 people. He 
states in that affidavit that he has taken 2,300 of these contracts and 
turned them over to Cantwell & Crews. 

Mr. Cantwell. I do not know what the contents of that affidavit 
are. but that is probably true. If that is what he says, that is prob- 
ably true. I think, if you desire any information in regard to those 

3 



4 ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

contracts — I only want to say this to you, that we had some diffi- 
culty with Mr. PoAvell. Mr. Powell was sent to Mississippi under a 
salary of $150 per month and expenses to take these contracts for our 
firm. He chariied in his expenses for notary fees and everything else. 
We learned that he was charging some of these people small sums of 
money, and I got him to St. Louis and asked him about it and jacked 
him up about it. Then we bought Powell's interest entirely out. 
There is an affidavit which was made on the Cth day of November, 
1911. You understand that these contracts taken by Powell have no 
connection with these others. 

Mr. Carter. Let us see what it is. Do you say that this provision, 
authorizing you to collect and receive all sums of money, lands, and 
})roperty that may laAvfully be collected, etc., is not in your contract 
with the Mississippi Choctaws? 

Mr. Cantwell. I will send you an exact copy of the contract with 
the Mississippi Choctaws. I believe there was a copy of the form fur- 
nished in that investigation of Indian contracts made by the commit- 
tee, but if there is not I will send you a copy of it. 

Mr. Carter. Now. then, Mr. Cantwell. I notice that Mr. Powell tes- 
tifies to having turned over about 4.200 contracts with Mississippi 
Choctaws to Crews & Cantwell. Then another gentleman states that 
he has tiu'ned over — I have not that affidavit here with me — but he 
states that he has turned over to Crews & Cantwell about 1.300 con- 
tracts with Mississippi Choctaws in addition to the ones turned over 
by Powell. That was a gentleman by the name of Luke W. Conerly, 
of Gulfport, Miss. 

Mr. Cantavell. If the committee desires, I have all the contracts, 
except about 400 which are in the possession of Mr. Luke W. Conerly, 
of Gulfport, Miss., in a safe deposit in Washington, with a memoran- 
dum of the evidence made by each claimant, and they are open to the 
inspection of the committee at any time. 

Mr. Carter. IMr. Powell says that he charged each applicant from 
$1.25 to $2.50. 

He says: 

After the 4,000 were registered, more applicants came in, and I ctiarged them 
$1.25 each. I made this charge because the money that had been advanced by 
Crews. Cantwell, and Hulbert was exhausted, and they refused to put up any 
more money for taking applications. This charge by me was to cover expenses 
of continuing the work of getting applications. I sent all these claims that I 
was making a charge for to Crews & Cantwell. I went from Bay St. Louis 
to Washington to see Mr. Cantwell, and he tried to get Hulbert to put up more 
money, and Hulbert notified me at Jackson, Miss., that he had put up $7,000, 
and that we had to take proof of the same, and that he was willing to put up 
the $7,000 for that purpose. He has not put it up yet. 

Then he says : 

I went to INIonticello and took applications for Crews and Cantwell and 
charged $2.50 each there. I took about KK) names there. I took a few names 
at Riloxi and charged $1.25 for each apiilicaut there. These claims were for 
Crews and Cantwell. I also visited Meridian and took about 88 applications 
there for Crews and Cantwell. but for whicli no charge was made. 

Mr. Cantwell. I Avant to say unqualifiedly and as strongly as I 
can say it that if Mr. Powell or anybody else says that we ever 
authorized him to charge $2.50 and knew he was charging $2.50, or 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 5 

any sum whatever, for any of these contracts, he is an unmitigated 
perjurer. Never, with our consent, was there one dollar of money 
charged; and, furthermore, as this affidavit which T submit to you 
shows, when we discovered that he had done it, we paid Powell a 
large sum of money to get rid of him. 

Mr. Carter. lATien did you sever the connection ? 

Mr. Cantaveli.. This circular which was sent out on the 16th of 
February, 1912, shows our full connection with Mr. Powell. 

Mr. Carter. Does it show the date? 

Mr. Cantaveijl. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Do you know what the date is? 

Mr. Cantwell. Some time in January or February, 1912. 

Mr. Carter. That was after the time he had made this affidavit. 
This was on April 27, 1911. 

Mr. Cantwell. He is an unmitigated liar if he ever says that any 
charge was ever made, because he charged us with all the expenses 
and we got vouchers for them. Our instructions to him were not 
under any circumstances to permit anybody to pay him anything. I 
would like to have this made a partof the record. 

IVIr. Carter. Yes, sir. Since the time that you severed connection 
with him you have not authorized him in any way to act for you or 
Mr. Crews? 

Mr. Cantavell. No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Has he continued to take contracts? 

Mr. Cantaat^ll. I do not know who he has taken contracts for. I 
understand he has been down to Mississippi. The only contracts 
taken for us were contracts taken by Mr. Luke W. Conerly, at Gulf- 
port, Miss. 

Mr. Carter. He is your agent ? 

Mr. Cantwell. Yes. sir. 

Mr. Carter. He is still continuing to take contracts? 

Mr. Cantavell. I believe so. 

Mr. Carter. When you separated from Mr. Powell, did you give 
him any letter of recommendation? 

Mr. Cantwell. Yes, sir; I committed the unpardonable folly of 
writing a letter to Powell — he is a very peculiar human being, you 
Icnow, very active — in which I complimented him for staying here 
and keeping open the Mississippi Choctaw matters. He and Nichols, 
as you know, stayed around in this Capitol and haunted everybody 
for montlis and months wlien practically everybody in Olclahoma and 
Mississippi had given up hope, and T Avrote a letter to Powell which 
gave Powell entirelv too much credit and which he immediatelv had 
lithographed. He changed one part of it, one sentence in the original 
copy, and spread it all over Mississippi. There is nothing in that to 
be ashamed of except that T was proliably too generous in giving him 
something to which he was not entitled. 

Mr. Carter. You found out at the time you made this settlement 
and turned him off that he was a man of bad repute? 

Mr. Cantwell. At the time we made this settlement? 

Mr. Carter. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cantwell. Mr. Carter, after we made that settlement with Mr. 
Powell and engaged Mr. Conerly, Powell, T was afraid, would go 
down to Mississippi and go to taking contracts. T was afraid that we 
r-ould not keep liim quiot. T did not want him to take any more con- 



6 ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

tracts. I agreed to pay Powell a small salary if he would go down 
there and stay there under the direction of Conerly. After we bought 
him out, simply to dispose of him, we agreed to pay him $50 or $00 
a month. 

Mr. Carter. So he did work for you after that? 

Mr. Cantwell. No; he went down there with the understanding 
that he was not to take any contracts at all. 

Mr. Carter. But was to draw a salary? 

Mr. Cantwell. Yes, sir. He telegraphed me from some point 
down there that the deal was off, and the next day he went to taking 
contracts. 

Mr. Carter. On his own hook? 

Mr. Cantwell. On his own hook, I suppose. I got out this circu- 
lar. That was the occasion for getting out this circular. 

Mr. Carter. Do you not think that giving him this letter from a 
firm of lawyers like yourself and Mr. Crews might give a certain 
standing that would enable him to take contracts that he could not 
possibly have gotten without that letter? 

Mr. Cantwell. I am inclined to think that that is probably true. 
* * * * * * * 

Mr. Carter. How much does the Harrison bill provide shall be 
paid to each claimant? 

Mr. Cantavell. Double the appraised allotment. 

Mr, Carter. Two thousand and eighty dollars? 

Mr. Cantavell. Approximately. 

Mr. Carter. It is stated here that 9,558 of these contracts are con- 
trolled by CrcAvs & Cantwell. Without regard to whether that is or 
is not true, a calculation of 9,558 multiplied by $2,000 would be 
$19,116,000, and if the fees set out in your contracts AA^ere paid to you, 
you would get about one-third of that sum. Some of them are 30 
per cent and some 35 per cent ? 

Mr. Cantavell. I do not think there are any 35 per cent. 

Mr. Carter. This one here is 35 per cent. 

Mr. Cantavell. That is not a Mississippi ChoctaAv contract. 

Mr, Carter. It provides for the enrollment of the people ? 

Mr. Cantavell. Yes, sir; but that would include freedmen and all. 

Mr. Carter. That would aggregate a fee of $6,338,000. That 
would be a great deal more than Mansfield, McMurray & Cornish 
CA'er dreamed of, and their fee of $750,000 seemed excessiA^e. 

Mr. Cantavell. That predisposes that all are going to be enrolled. 
In the next place, it includes in your estimate a great many people 
who are not Mississippi ChoctaAvs, who could be eliminated from 
consideration. 

Mr. Carter. If they were enrolled, they Avould be entitled to the 
same consideration ? 

:\: :^ ^. ^ 4: H: H< 

Have you hypothecated any of those contracts? 

Mr. Cantavell. Xo; I have hypothecated none of those contracts. 
There has never been a hypothecation of any of those contracts, so far 
as we are concerned. There are some gentlemen in Texas AAdio are in- 
terested with us in those contracts and in what sum may be recoA^ered 
who have adA'anced money for taking those contracts and haA'^e agreed 
to advance some money for the necessary expenses whene\"er we get 
an opportunity to be heard. 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 7 

Mr. Carter. How much have they advanced? 

Mr. Cantavell. They have advanced altogether — I do not know 
the exact figures, but it is probably $15,000. 

Mr. Carter. What security did they take? 

Mr. Cantwell. They took an agreement from us that they should 
have an interest in whatever we might recover. 

Mr. Carter. That would practically be a hypothecation? 

Mr. Cantwell. That is not hypothecation ; it is a declaration that 
they shall receive a certain proportion. 

Mr. Carter. How^ much are they to receive for financing it? 

Mr. Cantwell. My recollection is that in the case of the Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws it is 60 per cent, whatever it may be. 

Mr. Carter. Whatever your fee is? 

Mr. Cantwell. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. What is the name of the concern that is financing 
these contracts? 

Mr. Cantwt:ll. It was incorporated by these people under this 
agreement and called the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co. 

Mr. Carter. Who compose the corporation? 

Mr. Cantavell. A number of gentlemen in Houston, Tex. ; friends 
of Mr. Harris Masterson. 

Mr. Carter. Do you know any of the other names ? 

Mr. Cantwell. t do not know any except Mr. Masterson and Mr. 
Hulbert. 

Mr. Carter. Are those the only people you have negotiated with 
concerning these contracts for the purpose of raising money? 

]Mr. Cantwell. Those are the only people with whom we have 
ever signed a contract assigning any interest called the Texas-Okla- 
homa Investment Co. 

Mr. Carter. Did vou have any business with a fellow named 
C.B. Moiling in Ohio? 

Mr. Cantwell. No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. With Mr. Dechant? 

Mr. Cantwell. No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Did you have anj^ correspondence with him ? 

Mr. Cantwell. No, sir. He may be a stockholder in the Texas- 
Oklahoma Investment Co. He may have sold his stock to somebody 
else, but so far as my knowledge goes 

Mr. Carter (interposing). It was an organized stock company? 

Mr. CANinvELL. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. And the stock w^as sold ? 

Mr. Cantwell. Yes, sir 

Mr. Carter. AVhat is the capital? 

Mr. Cantwell. I think the capital is $100,000. 

Mr. Carter. What was the capitalization based upon? 

Mr. Cantavell. It was based on the assignment of the contract. 

Mr. Carter. What was the relative value between the capitaliza- 
tion and the fee? 

Mr. Cantavell. There was an agreement to put up $25,000, and to 
give Mr. Crews and myself 40 per cent of the stock. In other words, 
the contracts were assigned to the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co.; 
they agreed to provide a fund of $25,000. 

Mr. Carter. And you take GO per cent? 

Mr. Cantwell. Forty per cent. 



8 ENBOLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. Carter. And they 60 per cent? 

Mr. Cantwell. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. They to pay in $25,000 for the 60 per cent? 

Mr. Cantwell. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Then there has been really $25,000 paid instead of 
$15,000? 

Mr. Cantwell. You asked how much had been spent. 

Mr. Carter. There is still $10,000 to be paid in? 

Mr. Cantwell. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. And they were to have 40 per cent? 

Mr. Cantavell. Sixty per cent. 

Mr. Carter. Then, for $25,000, if these contracts should go 
through, they would expect to realize $3,802,000? 

Mr. Cantavell. Of course, Mr. Carter, I have not speculated on 
anything of that sort. AVhen the time comes it will be found, of 
course, that a great many of these people are not entitled to rights. 
We probably will determine that ourselves. 

******* 

Mr. Carter. How long was Powell in your employ ? 

Mr. Cantwell. Until February, 1912. 

Mr. Carter. Was Milton Turner in your employ? 

Mr. Cantavell. Not on the Mississippi Choctaw work. 

Mr. Carter. Was he in your employ? 

Mr. Cantwell. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Was Robert Fortune? 

Mr. Cantwell. Robert Fortune helped Turner on some of the 
Freedmen's contracts. 

Mr. Cari-er. Are any of those gentlemen Indians? 

Mr. Cantavell. No, sir; not that I know of. I do not know Robert 
Fortune at all. Turner is a negro. 

Mr. Carter. How about Powell? 

Mr. Cantwell. Powell claims to be an Indian. 

Mr. Carter. A^Hiat do you think about it? 

Mr. Cantwell. My opinion of the Indian would be very much 
lessened if Powell is an Indian. That is all I can say from what I 
have seen of him. When I wrote him a letter, which I think any 
white man or any Indian would have considered a generous letter, he 
simply used it to hui't the cause, I thought. 

Mr. Carter. Rolwrt Fortune is a colored man, and for a number 
of years was a deputy marshal in the Indian Territory. 

Mr. Cantwell. I do not know him. 

Mr. Carter. Did you have anyone else at that time working for 
you in this matter? 

Mr. Cantwell. Except Conerly; no, sir. 

Mr. Cartior. Conerly was employed since that time? 

Mr. Cantwell. Conerly was employed in the beginning, but with 
Powell. 

* * * * *_^* * 

Mr. Hltrley. I would like to ask Mr. Cantwell if he knows 
whether these gentlemen are connected with the company or syndi- 
cate that now liolds the Mississippi Choctaw contracts. He has 
spoken of Mr. Harris Masterson, of Houston, Tex., and Mr. E. L. 
Hulbert? 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 9 

Mr. Cantwell. Mr. S. L. Hulbert? 

Mr. Hurley. Is Mr. W. A. Smith, of Houston, Tex., also a direc- 
tor of the company? 

Mr. Cantwell. My recollection, Mr. Hurley, is that Mr. Smith is 
the secretary of the company. That is my recollection. 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. J. B. Crews, your partner or former partner • 

Mr. Cantwell (interposing). It is T. B, Crews. 

Mr. Hurley. And yourself, Mr. H. J. Cantwell 

Mr. Cantavell (interposing). Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hurley. That constitutes the board of directors of the com- 
pany, does it not ? 

Mr. Cantwell. Not now, because I resigned as a director for the 
pur])ose of giving them the control of the directory in Texas when 
they might have meetings. 

Mr. Hurley. Do you know whether or not the following-named 
persons are the principal stockholders of the company : Mr. H. J. 
Cantwell, Mr. T. B. Crews, both of St. Louis; Mr. Clifford Green, of 
El Campo, Tex.; Mr. S. L. Hurlbut, of El Campo, Tex.; Mr. H. 
Masterson, of Houston, Tex. ; J. H. Gavenan, of Galveston, Tex. ; 
H. Gavenan, of Galveston, Tex. ; L. Bryan, of Houston, Tex. ; J. J. 
Sweeney and W. H. Gill, of Houston, Tex. ? 

Mr. Cantavell. That is my recollection. Mr. Hurley. I think all 
of those gentlemen are stockholders in that company. 

Mr. Hurley. Now, state what connection, if any, Mr. C. B. Moi- 
ling, or C. B. Moiling & Co., of Houston, Tex., has vnth this company 
that has all these Mississippi Choctaw contracts. 

]SIr. Cantwell. I do not recollect his name. Possibly he may be 
a stockholder. 

Mr. Hurley. You do not know whether or not he is authorized to 
sell stocks or shares in the company that is holding these contracts? 

Mr. Canta\'ell. Mr. Hurley, any man who owns a certificate of 
stock in a corporation is entitled to sell his own shares. There is 
not any sold by the company, so far as the company is concerned, but 
if he has a certificate of stock he can sell it. 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Cantwell, the organization of this company is 
founded upon 

Mr. Cantwell (interposing). Whatever fees- 

Mr. Carter (continuing). The value of the contracts? 

Mr. Cantwell. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. And unless these ])eople are enrolled the stock is value- 
less? 

Mr. Cantwell. Absolutely. 

Mr. Carter. Then you aud your stockholders are in just exactly 
the same attitude with i-clation to aiding those people to be enrolled as 
the firm of Mansfield, McMurray & Cornish was in endeavoring to 
keep the people off the roll ? 

Mr. Cantavell. Except that we do not occupy a fiduciary relation — • 
there is no question about that. 

Mr. Hurley. I want to ask you about the statements in this com- 
munication. I am reading now from a letter from Mr. C. B. Moiling, 
dated Houston, Tex., June 12, 1911 : 

It is ostiiiinted thnt each Indian's share of the estate is worth ipS.OOO. The 
attorneys' rontracls call for 30 per cent of this, or $2,400, of which we are to 
get one-half, or $1,200. We are organizing a syndicate to talte over 1.000 of 



10 ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

those conti-MCts at $25 ])er contract. We will not accept subscriptions for less 
tliau 20 contracts, or $500. The estimated value of 20 contracts, if we win, 
will bo ai)proxiniatol.v $24,000, or a profit of $.28,500 upon each $.')(X) invested. 

^Ir. Cantwell, I never .saw the article nor authorized any such 
statement a.s that. I never saw any such letter, and T have no knowl- 
edge of any such letter beino^ sent. I can not imagine why it should 
have been sent or who could have sent it. 

Mr. Cartek. For the information of ]\Ir. Cantwell I wdll tell him 
that the letter Avas sent to me by a former Congressman, with the 
suggestion that I had better look into the matter. 

Mr. BoM). AVas this corporation organized before you acquired the 
contracts or after? 

Mr. Caxtwell. That corporation was organized after we acquired 
quite a number of contracts. 

Mr. Bond. The relation of attorney and client exists between you 
and these Indian claimants, does it not? 

Mr. Cantwell. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Bond. How many of these claimants came to you and em- 
ployed you as an attorney of their own volition ? 

Mr. Cantwell. Of our ow^n volition 

Mr. Bond (interposing). How many of them came to you of their 
own volition? 

Mr. Cantwell. I should say probably 250 or 300. 

Mr. Bond. Then, how many- 

Mr. Cantwell (interposing). That I had never heard of before — 
maybe 500. 

Mr. Bond. Did they come to St. Louis and employ you at your 
office? 

Mr. Cantwell. No, sir; by correspondence, 

Mr. Bond. Then how many did you acquire by solicitation or by 

hiring agents? 

Mr. Cantavell. .Vll the rest of them. 

******* 



Washington, D. C, June 29, lOH. 
The Secretaky or the Interior. 

Sir: i;^nder departmental instructions of the 13th ultimo, I have 
the honor to report my investigation concerning the representations 
made and methods adopted by certain solicitors in securing contracts 
from individual Indians Avho claim the right to enrollment as mem- 
bers of the ChoctaAv-ChickasaAv Tribe of Indians, and respectfully 
submit the folloAving conclusions relatiA'e to same: 

In my tour of investigation I visited Columbus, Ohio; St. Louis, 
Mo.: Muskogee. Poteau, Wilburton, and McAlester, Okla. ; San An- 
tonio and Houston, Tex.: Lake Charles. Baton Rouge, and Ncav Or- 
leans. La.: and Gulfport, Miss., in(|uiring into the matter and inter- 
rogated numerous persons Avho had knoAvledge of the representations 
made and uiethods adoi)ted by the soliciting agents in obtaining 
contracts from the class of claimants referred to. 

From my investigation I ascertained that during the past four 
years .several jiersons have been engaged in soliciting contracts from 
Choctaw and ChickasaAv Indians and freedmen of those tribes, and 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 11 

that one Alexander P. Powell, who claims to be a Choctaw Indian 
and a lineal descendant of one of the parties to the Dancing Rabbit 
Creek treaty of September 27, 1830, has been actively engaged in 
canvassing a large extent of coimtr}^ chiefly in the States of Alabama, 
Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, in procuring the names of unen- 
rolled persons who claim to possess Choctaw or Chickasaw Indian 
blood, and obtaining contracts from them to prosecute, on a con- 
tingent fee, their right to share in the distribution of the funds and 
property of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; and while, as above 
stated, there were several persons engaged in procuring contracts of 
similar character from unenrolled Indians of these tribes, it appears 
from the record that said A. P. Powell obtained more contracts from 
the class of claimants referred to than all of the other solicitors 
combined, notwithstanding the fact that Tie did not solicit contracts 
from any of the freed men. 

I failed to meet this man Powell during my tour of the localities 
in Avhich he has been operating very extensively the past four years, 
and therefore can not speak of him from personal knowledge, but 
have been told by many who know him that he shows a decided strain 
of Negro blood, is large of stature, prepossessing in appearance, 
shrewd and plausible, which, with his posing in the communities he 
visits in soliciting contracts as a very important person, has succeeded 
in arousing great enthusiasm among the people of the localities can- 
vassed by him, and has thus procured contracts with little or no 
difficulty from all persons who believed they possessed or were led 
by Powell to believe they possessed, any Choctaw or Chickasaw 
Indian blood. 

From what I was told by reputable persons at Lake Charles and 
Baton Eouge, La., and Gulfport, Miss., it would appear that said 
Powell was interested chiefly in procuring a large number of con- 
tracts, regardless of the ancestry of the applicants, as Mr. Luke W. 
Conerly, of Gulfport, Miss., told me that to his personal knowledge 
Powell obtained contracts from several families, the ancestry of 
whom as supplied by Powell was absurdly erroneous. It is also 
alleged that Powell took contracts from anj^ persons claiming to 
have Indian blood, and from many who had never claimed to pos- 
sess Indian blood until told by Powell that they were descendants of 
Indians who were i)arties to the Dancing Rabbit Creek treaty of 
1830 and therefore entitled to certain benefits under that treaty, 

Mr. C. R. Cline, an attorney of Lake Charles, La., and Hon. Isaac 
C. Boyd, of Leesville, La., also an attorney, a membei- of the present 
Louisiana Assembly, and who claims to possess Choctaw Indian blood, 
both informed me that there are al)out 300 persons living in the 
neighborhood of Kinder, Allen Parisli, La., who are of mixed descent, 
being of French, Spanish, Portuguese, and negro blood, with a 
very few of them possibly possessing some Indian blood, and the 
name " Red Bone " was given those of them who were supposed to 
have any Indian blood; that prior to Powell's visit to Kinder solicit- 
ing contracts with Indians it Avas regarded a great insult to be 
called a " Red bone,'' thus classing them as of Indian blood, but a 
number of them were advised by Powell that they were of Choctaw 
descent, as shown by a book which he possessed and by which he 
traced their ancestry, as eligible to eni'ollment, and it is alleg'ed that 
he thus obtained contracts from all of them, and since Powell thus 



12 ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

recognized those people, the name '' Red Bone " is no longer objec- 
tionable, but, on the contrary, all are desirous of being thus classed, 
and to be now called a " Red Bone " is exceedingly pleasing to each 
and all of them, as they believe that the cognomen fixes their status 
as of Indian blood, and entitles them to share in the property of the 
Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. 

Hon. Isaac C. Boyd, of Leesville, Vernon Parish, La., above re- 
ferred to, stated to me that in 1911 he was induced by one Mrs. Ella 
Taylor, of leesville. La., to enter into contract for Mississippi-Choc- 
taw rights, said Mrs. Taylor representing herself an authorized 
agent of A. P. Powell and Luke W. Conerly, whose headquarters 
were then at Gulfport, Miss., engaged in obtaining contracts from 
Choctaw claimants, for the prosecution of their right to participate 
in the funds and property of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; 
said jNIrs. Taylor stating to him that each beneficiary would be 
entitled to receive 320 acres of land or double the value of it in 
money, also anywhere from $5,000 to $10,000 in cash from the Choc- 
taw funds, but that in order to participate in this distribution, claim- 
ants must enter into contracts without delay, as the time limit would 
soon expire, therefore promptness in executing contracts for same 
was absolutely necessary. 

Mr. Boyd, who is of Choctaw blood, a lawyer by profession with 
quite a lucrative practice, and who is also a member of the State 
Assembly of Louisiana, feels chagrined in having fallen to the 
(lattei'ing presentation of the matter by Mrs. Taylor, resulting in 
his entering into a contract for himself and his sister and for which 
he i)ai(l Mrs. Taylor $7.50 for executing each of said contracts. 

Mr. Boyd stated that Mrs. Taylor procured a great many similar 
contracts at Leesville, La., and surrounding country, and that he has 
little doubt but that she thus realized in the neighborhood of $3,000 
from her charge of $7.50 to applicants for each contract obtained. 
Mr. Boj'^d further stated that after realizing he had been victimized 
ij) the sum of $15, through the enthusiasm aroused by a plausible 
talk, he, in order to have the solicitors prosecuted, if possible, made 
diligent inquiry of ]iersons who had entered into similar contracts to 
ascertain if any of them had represented themselves as Government 
officials, and was unable to find any person to whom they represented 
tiiemselves as being in any way connected with the Government or 
an official of the Choctaw Nation, but that the impression prevailed 
among the claimants that A. P. Powell and his assistants were fully 
emj)owered to procure the contracts they were engaged in soliciting 
from ChoctaAv claimants. 

Mr. Boyd still further stated that having talked a great deal against 
these solicitors, denouncing them as frauds and fakirs, that Powell 
Dever visited Leesville, La., to solicit contracts, but established him- 
.self for a short time at De Ridder, 21 miles distant, and sent notices 
to Leesville applicants to proceed to De Ridder for that purpose. 

I made i)articular in(iuiry as to Avhether or not I*owell or any of 
the other solicitors had been ever heard to represent themselves as 
Government officials or officials of the Choctaw Nation, but did not 
meet any person who stated that they had ever heard any of those 
soli(>itars make such a statement. On the contrary, many of the 
persons whom I interrogated with reference thereto stated that they 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 13 

liad frequently heard Powell say that he was fitrhtins: the Govern- 
ment to have the riohtful claims of the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Indians allowed; but notwithstandinc: the fact that Powell when 
questioned regardiniz; the matter invariably denied that he had any 
connection with the Government in the work he was engaged in, the 
impression prevailed, as expressed by Attorneys Cline and Boyd and 
Mr. Luke AV. Conerly. especially among the more ignorant persons, 
that Powell represented some high authority in the premises, he 
being engaged in executing contracts with claimants, usitig printed 
blank forms therefor, and this impression prevailed as to the several 
other solicitors engaged in obtaining similar contracts. 

When assigned to this investigation, the Indian Office furnished 
me, for my information, a voluminous file of correspondence with 
reference to this matter, which file embraced report of Special United 
States Indian Agent W. W. McConihe. dated May 2, 1911, with ac- 
companying exhibits, from Avhich record, together with Avhat I ascer- 
tained in my investigation, the facts appear to be as follow^s: 

1. The citizenship rolls of the Choctaw Nation, embracing those 
Indians entitled to share in the property of the tribe, was closed 
March 4, 1907 (act of Apr. 26, 1906; 34 Stat. L., 137, sec. 2). 

2. That there were possibly some persons omitted from the citi- 
zenship rolls who, because of the limitations imposed by the law as 
to time, were unable to produce the proof of their right to participate 
in the funds of the Choctaw Nation under article 14 of the treaty of 
September 27, 1830. 

3. The possibility that there were some Mississippi Choctaw^ In- 
dians whose right to enrollment had not been recognized induced a 
firm of attorneys — Messrs. Crews & Cantwell, of St. Louis, Mo. — 
to undertake the securing of legislation that would permit the re- 
opening of the rolls for the purpose of establishing the rights of those 
who had previously failed to establish their right or had failed to 
take advantage of the opportunity to do so. 

4. Messrs. Crews & CantAvell employed Alexander P. Powell, who 
asserts that he is a Choctaw Indian, to procure the names of unen- 
rolled Mississippi Choctaw Indians and produce evidence by tracing 
the ancestry to establish their right to enrollment, and to obtain con- 
tracts from them for the prosecution of their claims. 

5. Associated with Messrs. Crews & Cantwell was one S. L. Hurl- 
but, a banker residing at El Campo, Tex., who financed the project 
in the beginning by paying Powell $150 per month salary and his 
expenses. 

6. Powell, while employed by Crews & Cantwell, procured the 
names of about 4,200 persons who claimed, or were led to believe by 
Powell, that they were entitled to participate in the funds of the 
Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, and from each of wdiom he obtained 
a contract authorizing Crews & Cantwell to act as their attorneys in 
all legal proceedings in presenting to the Interior Department or 
any court such evidence as he or she might be able to produce in estab- 
lishing a right to participate in the distribution of the fund and 
property of the Choctaw-Chickasaw Indians of Oklahoma, which 
contracts provided that Crews & Cantwell were to receive 30 per 
cent of all sums of money, lands, and property that might be re- 
ceived by reason of the right claimed. Powell did not make any 



14 ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

charge to the daimaiits while oporatino; under the above stated salary, 
until a short time pi'evious to severin/r his connection with Crews & 
Cantwell, when he commenced charging the claimants $1.25 for each 
contract executed, and while engaged in this work in the employ of 
Crews & Cantwell it ajipears from the record that Powell received 
$2,1»71.02 from them, $000 of which was for salary and remainder 
for expenses incurred by him as shown by letter from Mr. S. L. 
Hurlbut's office, dated March 8. 1911, copy herewith Exhibit A. 

7. Powell's connection with Crews & Cantwell appears to have 
terminated in March, 11)11, and he then commenced soliciting con- 
tracts for William P. Matthews, an attorney of Washington, D. C., 
with office in the Evans Puilding, and the contract procured by 
Powell in the name of Mr. Matthews are similar in every respect to 
those he obtained for Crews & Cantwell, except as to name of the 
attorne_y. 

The CreAvs & Cantwell contracts contain the stipulation that their 
appointment as attorneys is joint, and that in the event of the death 
of either, the survivor shall succeed to all rights and benefits, and 
perform all the duties imposed by the contract upon the attorneys. 
This same stipulation is contained in the printed form of contract 
taken in the name of W^illiam P. Matthews [copy herewith], and the 
fact that it does so appear would indicate that Mr. Matthews had 
nothing to do with the drafting of the form, but that the wording 
of the Crews & Cantwell contract was probably adapted by A. P. 
Powell, simply substituting the name of W^illiam B. Matthews, as 
attorney, for that of Crews & Cantwell, and Powell thus continued 
procuring contracts from any and all persons whom he met, who 
believed, or were led to believe, that they possessed Choctaw or 
Chickasaw Indian blood, and from each of whom he collected $2.50 
for his services in executing the papers. 

8. After Powell discontinued securing contracts for Crews & Cant- 
well and started soliciting for Attorney William E. Matthews and 
charging applicants $2.50 for each set of papers executed, it is al- 
leged he procured contracts from a number of persons residing in 
and around Kinder, Allen Parish, La., who did not claim to be of 
ChoctaAv descent, but were advised by Powell that he possessed a 
book which enabled him to trace the ancestry of every living person 
who possessed any Choctaw blood, and that he had traced those 
people entitled to enrollment as descendants of certain persons ap- 
pearing as beneficiaries under the Choctaw treaty of 1830. As to 
the book referred to as possessed by Powell, which is said to have 
been produced in evidence by him very frequently, I was informed 
by Mr. Luke W. Comerly, of Gulfport, Miss., who was for some 
months associated with Powell, that he carried with him for reference 
in tracing the ancestry of applicants for enrollment a copy of volume 
7, "American State Papers", which contains the names of 19,554 
Choctaw Indians who were parties to the Dancing Rabbit Creek 
treaty of 1830, as per roll made by F. W. Armstrong, special agent, 
under date of September, 1831, wliich volume was published in 1860. 

10. Crews & CantAvell, as attorneys for a number of these claim- 
ants, with evidence as to some of the unenrolled Mississippi Choc- 
taws to an equitable right to share in the funds of the Choctaw 
Nation of Oklahoma, have sought legislation to reopen the rolls to 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 15 

permit them to prosecute the claims of these persons with whom 
they have contract. 

11. The financing of the project to secure reimbursement of Crews 
& Cantwell and S. L. Hurlbut for previous expenditures was 
effected by incorporating the " Texas-Okhihoma Investment Co.," 
chartered under the laws of the Territory of Arizona, November 14, 
1911. The articles of incorporation provide for a capital stock of 
$100,000, or 1,000 shares of the par value of $100 each, the directors 
of the company as incorporated being S. L. Hurlbut, of El Campo, 
Tex. ; H. Masterson and W. A. Smith, of Houston, Tex. ; and T. B. 
Crews and H. J. Cantwell, of St. Louis, Mo.; and the principal 
stockholders are T. B. Crews and H. J. Cantwell, of St. Louis, Mo. ; 
Clitl'ord Greve and S. L. Hurlbut, of El Campo. Tex. ; H. Masterson, 
L. Bryan & Co., J. J. Sweeney, and W. H. Gill, of Houston, Tex.; 
and J. H. Kempner, of Galveston, Tex. 

Two hundred and fifty shares of the 1.000 shares of the stock of 
this company were sold at par value of $100 per share, thus realiz- 
ing $25,000 in cash, with which Crews & Cantwell and S. L. Hurlbut 
were reimbursed for previous expenditures and a contingent fund 
created to meet future expenses as incurred. 

12. Crews & Cantwell turned over to the Texas-Oklahoma Invest- 
ment Co. the contracts procured for them by Alexander P. Powell, 
numbering about 4,200, and received in cash from the fund realized 
from the 250 shares of the stock sold, reimbursement for their 
previous expenditures in connection with their Mississippi Choctaw 
contracts, and leaving the 750 unsold shares in the treasury as 
common property of the company. 

In promoting the organization of the Texas-Oklahoma Invest- 
ment Co. flattering figures of prospective returns to investors therein 
appear to have been sent out to prominent persons throughout the 
country, as evidenced by letter of Mr. C. B. Moling, of Houston, Tex., 
under date of June 12, 1911, to Hon. W. L. Dechant, of Middletown, 
Ohio, which reads as follows : 

Houston, Tkx., June 12, 1911. 
Hon. W. L. Dechant, 

Middletoicn, Ohio. 

Dear Sir : In 1820 the United States Government made a treaty with the 
Choctaw Indians, then living in Mississippi, vi^hereby the Government bought 
5,000,000 acres of the Indians, and in return gave to the Indians all the lands 
lying in the Indian Territory north of Red River up to the Canadian and east 
of the ninety-eighth meridian, and paid for moving as many of the Indians out 
to this land as desired to go. 

The Choctaws still had 10,000,000 acres left back in Mississippi, and in 1830 
the Government made another treaty with them whereby the Government pur- 
cha.sed the i-emaining lands for $8,000,000. In this treaty it ivas agreed that 
the reynaininy Indians irere to be protected in the community property or the 
original lands in Indian Territory granted them hy the treaty of 1820. 

The Government still holds approximately .3,4.'i0.000 acres of these original Ter- 
ritory lands, as well as several millions in cash, in trust for the Choctaws who 
have not as yet been allotted their share. 

A reputable and responsible firm of attorneys, with offices in St. Louis and 
Washington, D. C, have secured contracts with 4,200 Choctaw Indians to se- 
cure them their allotment of lands and money upon a percentage basis. The 
contracts provide that the attorneys are to receive 30 per cent of all lands and 
money received. These 4,2(M) contracts are one signed by the Indian, two wit- 
nesses to his signature and acknowledged before a notary piiblic. 



16 ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

These contracts, providinfr for this conthiseut fee. have' been recognized by 
the Government, and Congress i>asse(l a resolution nialving all such contracts 
a first lien ujm)!! the property of the Indian. This insures direct payment to 
us of our fee. 

For financing the jiroject. such as hunting up the Indians and securing the 
proof of each individual Indian to his right of participation and the attorneys 
for working the hill through Congress, one-half of the profits to go to the attor- 
neys and the other half to those who financed it. 

It is estimated that each Indian's share of the estate is worth $8,000. The 
attorneys' contract calls for 30 per cent of this, or $2,400, of which we are to 
get one'-half. or $1,200. 

^^'e are organizing a syndicate to take over 1.000 of these contracts at $25 
per contract. We will not accept subscription for less than 20 contracts, or 
$r)00. The estimated value of 20 contracts, if we win, will be approximately 
$24.(H^). or a profit of $2;!.nO0 upon each $500 investment. 

The proofs of these claims for these 4.200 Indians has all been secured and 
has been presented to the c(mgressional Committee on Indian Affairs and 
reported favorably. This committee consists of 19 Members of Congress. 

At this next session of Congress the bill will be introduced and voted upon, 
and as there are several i)recedents identical to this proposition wherein the 
other Choctaws secureil their rights, we have every reason to believe that the 
bill will pa.ss. 

Senator Owen has but 1.500 of these contracts with another batch of Choc- 
taw Indians, yet he secured a fee of $6,000,000; he had a contract for one-half 
of what he secured, while ours is but 30 per cent. Other similar contracts 
have been made, and all of them have been passed by Congi'ess; and as the 
Government is holding the lauds and money belonging to this tribe and have 
i.o interest in it either way, we see no just reason why they should not act 
upon these claims favorably at the next session. 

We are unable to go into all the details of this proposition in this letter to 
.von. but I have spent several days investigating it, and conclude that the 
chances for defeat are no greater than in the ordinray course of business. I 
believe the estimated results herein will be obtained, or substantially so. 

I expect to give the matter my attention and to look after the interest of 
those who come into the deal at my request, and to take a proper assignment 
of the contracts and i)lace them in the hands of some local trust company or 
bank with authority to make the collection and disburse the receipts to the 
subscribers in the amounts to which each subscriber would be entitled at same; 
it will be safer for the subscribers. 

My charges will be about 20 per cent of whatever profits you may make on 
the deal, if none are made, you ow'e me nothing. I would like to have you 
take a flier in this, say, for $500 or $1,000, and to notify me of your intentions 
promptly. Should you happen to lose. I think you will agree wnth me that it 
was .-It least a good bet as the prospective returns justify taking the chance. 

Awaiting your prompt reply, either by letter or wire, I am, 
Yours, very truly, 

C. B. Moling. 

To the foregoing coiuimiiiication of Mr. Moling, Mr. Dechant re- 
plied as follows: 

Minni^i-nowN, Ohio, July 2^, 1911. 
C. B. Moling, 

'fli Mil sou Building, Houston, Tex. 

Mv Dk.mj .Mk. Mor.iNo : Your letter of June 12 was receive<l in my absence, 
hence delay in answering. 

I have gone over same carefully and note what you say, and it would seem 
to me if Congress has taken the steps enumerated by you the i)roposition is a 
good one. and on further investigation I might be induced to come in, every- 
thing api)earing in good shape. 

Who is tlie lirm of attorneys representing you and located at St. Louis and 
Washington, and what is the name of the member of the firms looking specially 
after the matter'.^ 

Can you refer me to the reports wherein the Government has recognized the 
contracts referred to providing for a contingent fee, etc.. in these specific cases; 
also, can you further refer me to the congressional reports, where the Congress 
recognizetl such contracts and made them a valid first Hen on the Indians' 
property ? 



ENROIXMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 17 

What Congress passed this resolution, legalizing these contracts as liens, and 
is it the present Committee of Congress on Indian Affairs to whom the proofs 
of the 4,200 claims yon refer to. were presented and reported, favorably? 

What is the name of the attorney who represented the matter to the Indian 
Affairs Committee of Congress, and secured the passage of the favorable reso- 
lution V 

On receipt of a letter from you in reply to the above I will take the matter 
up more fully and. advise you at once what I will do. Thanking you for bring- 
ing this matter to my attention. 

I am, as ever, yours, W. L. Dechant. 

To the inquiries contained in the foregoing letter of Judge Dechant 
Mr. Moling replied as follows: 

Houston, Tex., July 28, 1911. 
Hon. W. L. Dechant, 

Middletoum, Ohio. 

My Dear Judge : I have your letter of the 24th, in regard to further informa- 
tion regarding the Choctaw Indian contacts, etc. 

I sent for Mr. S. L. Hurlbut, who owns the contracts, and gave him your 
letter and asked him to give me the information desired, and I herewith hand 
you his dictated letter, as also the brief he refers to with the clippings attached. 

In regard to the brief and the clippings, he requests that you t^ike care of 
them, as they are all he has here in Houston. 

It might be a good idea for you to write to Mr. Cantwell in Washington, as 
he is thoroughly familiar with all the details, and then the information would 
come to you first handed. 

I am not itersonally acquainted with Mr. Cantwell or his partner. Mr. Crews, 
in St. Louis, but from what I learned they are very capable men in their line 
of business and have worked other similar contracts through Congress, but 
I know ;\Ir. Hurlbut for several years: he is all right, and I consider him 
straight and reliable; my dealings with him has all been in the real estate 
line and all very satisfactory; he stands well in this community. 

It might al.so be a good idea to get in touch with the chairman of the present 
Committee on Indian Affairs; he ought to know all about it. 

As stated in my letter of June 32, I think it's a good bet, for the reason I 
believe the (Jcvernment will carry out the terms of its treaty made with 
them in 1S20 and 1830; if they do, then these contracts will be good. 

Awaiting your further advices, I am. 
Very truly yours. 

C. M. Moling. 

The presentation of the matter as above set forth by Mr. Moling 
to Judge Dechant for financing the project was so flattering as to 
justify the average speculator in taking a chance, and it would 
appear, from the sale of one-fourth of the stock of the Texas-Okla- 
homa Investment Co. at its par value, that no great difficulty was 
experienced in promoting and consummating this financing of the 
jiroject. 

About a year subsequent to the organization of the Texas -Oklahoma 
Investment Co. for financing tlie project of handling Mississippi- 
Choctaw Indian contracts taken in the name of Crews & Cantwell, 
Mr. Albert J. Lee, of Ardmore, Okla., a member of the law firm of 
Ballinger & Lee, claiming to represent a large number of persons 
who claim a right in the tribal property of the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Indians in Oklahoma, on a contingent fee of from 12^ to 40 
per cent, and which do not conflict with the claims handled and rep- 
resented by the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co., but are in a line 
with them, desired, as shown by certain correspondence relative 
thereto, to raise a fund of $10,000 to meet indebtedness incurred in 
the prosecution of their Indian claims and with which to continue 

51402—14 2 



18 ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

the fio;ht for their clients, and to show tliat persons engaged in 
handling the claims of nonenrolled Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians 
have succeeded in interesting many prominent persons in such 
claims, I submit copy of tabulated statement of said Albert J. Lee, 
dated October 17, 1912, setting forth the prospective profits that he 
calculates upon deriving from his handling of said claims, together 
with an indorsement of same by ]Mr. Harris Masterson, an attorney 
of Houston. Tex., who is a prominent financier and promoter of 
projects of this character, which statement of Attorney Lee and 
indorsement of Mr. Masterson reads as follows : 

October 17, 1912. 
Mr. Harris Masterson, 

Houston, Tex. ' 

Dear Sir: Mr. Webster Ballinger and I represent some 13,000 persons who 
claim a right in the tribal property of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians 
in Oklahoma. Of the above number of persons represented by us, there are 
some 3.738 who are conclusively, as shown by the Government records, en- 
titleti to share in the distribution of the tribal property. An individual share 
is estimated at $3,000 cash. We represent these people under contracts pro- 
viding for a contingent fee of from 12* to 40 per cent of the value of each 
share. I am attaching a statement showing the value of our fees. The state- 
ment also shows the amount of said fees we have already contracted for. 

You will observe that my individual share of said fee will amount to $850,911, 
based upon the cases I consider certain ; and that if we succeed in one-third 
of the cases that are uncertain, or rather if we succeed in enrolling 3.000 out 
of the 10,000 doubtful cases, my individual share of the fee would be $2,065,911. 

I am in urgent need of funds with which to meet indebtedness incurred in 
the i)rosecution of these claims, and with which I may be enabled to continue 
the fight for our clients, and I want to raise $16,000, which I will agree to 
return with interest, and will assign the people furnishing the money 40 per 
cent of my individual share of the fee. Estimated upon the cases considered 
certain, this would return about .$22 for every dollar subscribed, and upon 
the basis of one-third of the uncertain cases going through in addition to those 
that I consider certain, the estimated return would be about $120 for every 
dollar advanced. 

The following pages will give you some idea of the nature and basis of the 
claims. 

CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW LANDS, AND OTHER PROPERTY. 

In southeastern Oklahoma, in what was formerly the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Nations, are nearly 3,000,000 acres of land, which the Federal Government 
will offer for sale from day to day from November 12 to December 23, this year. 
These lands are classed as follows : 900,000 acres agricultural, 445,000 acres 
agricultural surface, with deposits of coal and asphalt, 1,500,000 acres pine and 
hardwood timber. 

In addition to the above lands the coal and asphalt deposits are shortly to 
be sold. The United States mine inspector has estimated that the coal is worth 
in royalties to the Choctaw and Chickasaw people at least $70,000,000. There 
is now on deposit to the credit of these two tribes something like $1,000,000, 
derived from the sale of town sites 

VALtTE OF PROPERTY. 

It is reasonable to assume that the Federal Government will be able to get 
for the coal deposits at least one-half of the amount that said deposits are esti- 
mated to be worth in royalties, which would be, in round numbers, $35,000,000, 

Should the 3,000,000 acres of laud bring an average price of $10 per acre, 
which is a very reasonable estimate considering the fact that there is standing 
timber on 1,500,000 acres thereof, $30,000,000 will be derived from this source. 

There is no accurate estimate of the value of the asphalt deposits, but they 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 19 

are worth several liimdred thousancl dollars. Elimiuatiug the value of the 
asphalt deposits, we have the followiug values: 

On deposit $10, 000, 000 

Value of the coal 35,000,000 

Value of the surface and timber 30,000,000 

Total value of the property 66, 000, 000 

OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY. 

The abo^e property belongs to the citizens of the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations of Indians under a grant made by the Federal Government under 
the terms of the treaty of September 27, 1830. The grant conveyed to said 
Indians all the lands lying between the Canadian and Red Rivers, the Arkan- 
sas line, and the one hundredth parallel west. All of said land, however, 
with the exception of the 3.000,000 acres above referred to, has been parceled 
out to the individual Indians in allotments of 320 acres of average value laud. 

As the propertj- belonged to the citizens of the tribes of whom the Federal 
Government was the guardian, it became the duty of the Federal Government, 
upon the dissolution of the tribal governments, to ascertain who were the 
citizens entitled to share in the distribution of the property. This, the Fed- 
eral Government undertook to do. The tribal governments agreed to such 
action upon condition that each citizen be allotted 320 acres of average value 
land and should then share in the proceeds derived from the sale of any lands 
remaining undisposed of after all allotments had been made. It was also 
agreetl that certain town sites, coal deposits, asphalt deposits, and timber- 
lands should be withheld from the allotment scheme. 

Congress passed seven different acts under which the citizenship of the 
t"wo tribes should be determined and the distribution made. The acts were: 
Act of June 10, 1896; act of June 7, 1897; act of June 28, 1898; act of May 
31, 1900; act of July 1, 1902; act of March 3, 1905; and the act of Apiil 26, 
1906. The latter act provided that the question of citizenship should be 
finally closed upon March 4, 1907, and since that date no person has been 
added to the rolls of those Indians entitled to share in the property. As- 
sistant Attorney General J. W. Howell stated to the House Committee on 
Indian Affairs that the above-mentioned acts were "inherently defective," 
and " administered so as to prevent a full realization of their purpose." 
(Hearing on H. R. 19279, 61st Cong., 2d session, p. 265.) 

WHY THE CLAIMANTS WHOM WE REPRESENT WERE OMITTED FROM THE ROLLS. 

1. Sufficient time was not given to do the work. The Department of" the 
Interior was forced to act pro forma upon the claims of more than 2,000 
persons during the week preceding March 4, 1907. 

2. The commission created by act of Congress was incompetent and com- 
posed of laymen who conceived the idea that it was their duty to oppose 
the applicants and restrict the number of persons entitled to share to the 
fewest possible. This commission suppressed records and failed to tran.smit 
the full case of applicants to the Secretaiy of the Interior, who had a super- 
visory authority and right of review. Upon charges filed against officers of 
this commission, two of them were forced to resign. (Ses. Doc. 357, 59th 
Cong., 2d sess.) 

3. The tribal officials who had control of tribal funds sought at all times to 
restrict the number of persons enrolled in order that the share of each would 
be greater. 

4. The attorneys, Mansfield, McMurray & Cornish, employed under Govern- 
ment sanction to represent the tribes, for au extra consideration of .$750,000 
paid out of tribal funds, and which latter employment was unknown to the 
Government officials, succeeded in defeating the claims of nearly 4,000 persons 
who had !)c>en enrolled by .iudgments of tiie United States courts, rendered in 
cases appealed from the action of the connnission to the Five Civilized Tribes 
under the provisions of the act of June 10, 1896. This action was Investigated 
by the committee of Congress, and. with respect to the persons enrolled by 
.iudgments of the United States courts, this counnittee said: "There was no 
way by which persons so enrolled — locally known as court citizens — could be 
eliminated lawfully from participation in the tribal estate." 



20 ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

These tribal iittoincys siicfeedeu. liowevor, in eliniiar.tiiig fruiu the citizen- 
ship rolls tlie persons "plneecl thereon by judgment of the United States courts 
by lobbying through a provision of law which bec<nne part of the agreement 
entered into by the Government and the tribes cont:iined in the act of July 
1. 1902. with reference to the distribution of the property, by having created a 
spet-ial court to review the judgments of the United States courts, and a com- 
mittee of Congress has reported upon the manner in which this court was 
created, as follows: 

"After the agreement had been duly signed by the representatives of the two 
nations and by the representatives of the Government, and after it was trans- 
mitted to Congress for" ratification and approval, sections 31, 32, and 33 were 
Inserted at the reque.vt of McMurray, which sections are predicated on the 
assumiition that the United States courts in the Indian Territory, acting under 
the act of June 10. 1S96, had jidmitted persons to citizenship in the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations without notice to both of said nations. It was con- 
tended by the nations that in such i>roceedings notice to each of said nations 
was indispensable, and they claimed and insisted that the proceedings in the 
X'uited States courts in the Indian Territory, under the act of June 10, 1896, 
should have been confined to a review of the action of the commission to the 
Five Civilized Tribes upon tlie record in each case and should not liave ex- 
tended to a trial de novo of the ques-tion of citizenship. These sections author- 
ized the two nations jointly, or either of said nations acting separately and 
making the other a party defendant, by a bill in equity filed in the citizenship 
court, to bring a suit for the purpose of testing the validity of all such decisions 
of the rnitwi StiUes courts. It further provided that 10 persons admitted to 
citizenship or enrollment by the United States courts, with notice to but one 
of said nations, should be made defendants to a suit iiS representatives of the 
entire class of persons similarly situated. In other words, it authorized the 
bringing of a test suit, and provided that in the event said citizenship judg- 
ments or decisions were annulled or vacated, any party thereto, within 90 
days thereafter, by a written application, might have his case transferred to 
the citizenship court by the court where the judgment was entered nnd that the 
citizenshii) court should have jurisdiction therein as if no judgment or decision 
had been rendered by the United States court. It was providetl tliat the judg- 
ment of the citizenship court should be final. 

This act provided that it should not be effective until submitted to and rati- 
fied by a vote of the two nations, but exception was made as to sections 31, 32, 
and 33, creating the citizenship court, but whicli became effective upon the 
passage and approval of the act. 

Immediately following the passage of the act ratifying the agreement of 
1902. the judges authorized to be appointed to constitute tiie citizenship court 
were a]»i)ointed, as follows: Spencer Adams, of North Carolina; Henry S. Foote, 
of California; and Walter L. Weaver, of Ohio. Judge Foote ai>pears to have 
been appointed upon the reconunendatiou of Senator Stewart, who was then 
chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, and Judge Adams, on the 
lecommendation of Senator I'ritchard, of North Carolina. Judge Foote was 
the brother-in-law of Senator Stewart. The law creating this court is without 
legislative parallel; the manner of its enactment was extraordinary, and the 
authority which it conferred upon the court it ci-eated is without precedent in 
American jurisprudence. 

As soon as this court was created and organized, the firm of Mansfield. Mc- 
Murray & Cornish i)roceeded to bring before it a very large number of claims 
of " court citizens," and they succeeded in eliminating from the rolls between 
3.5(H» iuid 4.000 persons. They tlien claimed a fee of 9 per cent on a basis of 
$4.S00 per i)erson, as jn-ovldetl in the contingent-fee contract made in 1901. before 
referred to. which had not been approved in accordance with law. (H. liept. 
No. 2273. (Jlst Cong.. 2d sess.) 

It was reported, and commonly accepted as a fact, that Jud.ges Foote and 
Adams received a part of the fee paid INIansfield, McMurray & Cornish, and in 
the case of Adams v. Rutler, in which case Adams sued ex -United States Sena- 
tor Butler, of North Carolina, for libel, it was shown that Adams received 
$r)0.O(K» of the fee. While the committee was considering the evidence upon 
which the above reiwrt was made. Judge Adams cut his throat with a razor. 
Judge Foote died shortly after the fee was paid. Foote was a confirmed 
drunkard. 

5. Theie are many other reasons impossible of explanation in this .short 
statement. 



ENEOLLMEXT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 21 

CONGRESS NOW CONSIDERING CLAIMS. 

Siuoe the closing of the rolls those whose names appear thereon and the 
Representatives in Congress from Oklahoma have constantly i)ressed for legis- 
lation directing the Secretray of the Interior to finallj wind up the affairs of 
the tribes and to distribute the funds to those enrolled. This Congress has 
refused to do, and at each session has considered the enactment of legislation 
that would place upon the rolls all meritorious cases. The hearings upon such 
proposed legislation has progressed to the point where it now seems certain 
that action will be taken at the coming session of Congress. The Secretary of 
l!ie Interior, on February 12. 1910, recommended that Congress give him 
anthcuit.T to add to the rolls two classes of persons who had been omitted. 
(App. Hearing on H. R. 19279, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) And durhig the last ses- 
sion of Congress the Secretary advised Congress that there were several dif- 
ferent classes of eases which should be reheard before the estates were finally 
wound up. and suggested that Congress give him authority to hear the cases 
and to add the names to the rolls of those persons found entitled to be placed 
thereon. 

It is our purpose to continue the fight for our clients until definite action is 
taken l>y Congress. We have been strong enough at all times to prevent a final 
settlement and distribution of the property. The opposition now realizes that, 
in order to get their own shares of the property, they must consent to legisla- 
tion giving our clients their rights. I have spent a great deal of money and 
have given all of my time since Marcli 4, 1907. in the work of securing justice 
for our clients, and I shall continue to do so until some final action is taken by 
Congress. 

ESTIMATED VALUE OF EACH CLAIMANT'S SHARE OF PROPERTY. 

As the lands have all either been allotted or ordered to be sold, the persons 
added to the rolls will have to take their share of the estate in cash, and it 
has been tentatively agreed that each person so enrolled is to receive $3,000 
in cash. 

Yours, very trul.v. 

Albert J. Lee. 

CLAIMS IN CFI0CT.\W AND CHICKASAW ESTATE. 

Below is the list of the number of persons claiming a sha.re of the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw tribal estates, represented by Ballinger & T.ee, attorneys, and 
the basis of their employment. 

The value of an individual share in the est;!te is estimated at $3,000 in cash. 

Number of individual claimants: 3,73^, more or less. 

Of tlie above numlter 2,<).")1 persons, more or less, are represented under 
written contracts and powers of attorney, for a contingent fee of 40 per cent 
of claims recovered; 4S7 are represented by agreement with other attorneys 
who hold contracts for 25 per cent of recovery, the share of Rallinger & Lee 
being 12^ jer cent of the amount recovered. One thousand two hundred persons, 
more or less, are represented by Ht'llinger & Lee under 50 iier cent contract, of 
which Ballinger & Lee's sliare will estimate $500 per person. 

Lee's proposed sale of 40 per cent of his individual shares, or fee. is figured 
as follows : 

2,051 i)ersons. 
$3.0f)0 A'aluc of individual sh;ire. 

$0,153,000 Total value of shares of 2,051. persons. 
40 per cent basis of fee. 



$2,461,200 P:stimated fee. 
487 persons. 
$3,000 Value of share. 



$1,461,000 Total value of shares of 487 persons. 

12^ per cent basis of fee of Rallinger & Lee. 



22 ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

$183,023 Total estimated fee of Balliugei- & Lee for 487 persons. 
1.200 persons. 
.$500 Balliuger & Lee's fee per person. 



$600,000 Total estimated fee for 1,200 persons. 
.$2,401,200 
1 83.023 
GOO.OOO 



$0,244,223 Total of Ballinger & Lee's fee. 
Less 150.(100 Estimated expense of collection. 



$3,094,223 

45 per cent with which assistance was contracted. 



$1..392,400 Estimated cost of assistance. 
$3,094,223 Net fee. 
Less 1.392.400 Cost of assistance. 



2) $1,701,823 Net fee to Ballinger & Lee. 



850,911 Net fee to Lee. 

40 per cent proposed assignment. 



$340,304 Fee which will go to owners of the 40 ]ier cent to be sold. 

In addition to the above cases, we represent about 10.0<iO people whose recoi'ds 
do not conclusively show that they are entitled to share in the distribution of 
the property, but if Congress permits ]iroof to be made in these cases, I esti- 
mate that at least 3.0O0 of them will be good. Our fee in these cases is 40 per 
cent, and in the event of success in the 3.000 cases indicated, my individual fee 
would approximate $2,005,911. My proposed assignment includes all of these 
eases. 

Albert J. Lee. 



Masterson &; Masterson. Attorxeys at Law. 
Houston, Te.r., Octoher 11, 1912. (Received Apr. 20, 1914.) 
To whom it mail concern: 

I have carefully read the statement of Albert .7. Lee. of the law firm of 
Ballinger & Lee. in his letters of the 17th instant, relating to the claims of the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians, represented by his firm, and from my own 
knowledge of the facts, the manner in which the estate of these Indians was 
administered by officers of the Federal Government, and the steps that are now 
being taken to protect the interests of the claimants, I know that Mr. Lee's 
statement is substantially correct. The claims represented by Mr. Lee are 
meritorious; however, he does not by half set forth the merits of the claims, 
nor does his statement fully cover the injustice that has been peri>etrated upon 
the class of Indians whom he represents. It would be impossible for him to 
fully deal with the merits of these claims in a brief letter. 

The records in these cases are so plain and so clearly disclose fraud and 
incompetent administration that I am firmly convinced that Congress will 
restore the claimants to their rights. I therefore believe that money advanced 
to Mr. Lee in aid of his cases will return a big profit within the next two 
years, and that such profits will not be less than a return of $20 for every 
dollar advanced him. 

On the 7th day of this month I furnished $2 000 to Mr. Lee in order to 
afford him temporary relief in connection with the Indian claims represented 
by him. and in addition thereto I am sub.scribing $2,000 to the fund of $16,000 
which he is now endeavoring to raise, notwithstanding the fact that I am 
largely interested in similar claims of the Choctaw Indian descendants. 

Of my own knowle<lge — for I have investigated many of the claims of the 
clients of Mr. Lee before deciding to invest $4,000 in the enterprise. I know 
that the claims of the Indians so investigated, whom ?tlessrs. Ballinger & Lee 
represent, are full of merit. I therefore consider the $2,000 already invested 
and subscription of $2,000 to be in the nature of a fine siDeculative investment. 



ENEOLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 23 

It is hoped, and I think reasonably oertain, that the Choctaw claimants will 
be given relief dnring the coming session of Congress. 

These claims do not conflict with the claims handled and represented by the 
Texas-OIilahoma Investment Co., bnt are in line with them. 
Yours, very truly, 

H. Masterson. 

I visited Muskogee, Okla.. where I conferred with Commissioner 
Wright and Superintendent Kelsey with reference to persons solicit- 
ing contracts from tJie Indians of Oklahoma, and then proceeded to 
Poteau, Okla., where I met T. V. Sprinkel, an attorney of that town, 
whoui I learned had been obtaining contracts from certain Indians, 
and upon interrogating him relative thereto, he stated with apparent 
frankness that he has been engaged a^ intervals the past three years 
in ]:)roeuring contracts from Choctaw Indians who are interested in 
what is known as the Glenn-Tucker claim, and that he has not 
solicited contracts in any other Indian claim ; that there are about 
700 Choctaw families interested in said claim; and that he has pro- 
cured contracts from 75 of the leading families interested, and only 
from those of them with whom he has been acquainted for many 
years pa.st. 

He stated that to meet the expenses incurred by him in executing 
the contracts and preparing the case he charges each family $10 who 
employ him, this being the total charge he makes to each family 
regardless of the number in the family, and that his contracts pro- 
vide for pa,vment to him of a 25 per cent contingent feed of what- 
ever he may recover for them. He further stated that he has been 
engaged in this work since 1011, during which time he has made 
two trips to Washington, D. C., in the interests of his clients, and 
that up to the present time the total received by him from the 75 
families with whom he has contracts amounts to onlv $129. 

He also stated that Webster Ballinger, Walter S. Field, and W. W. 
Wright, attorneys of Washington, D. C., have a large number of 
similar contracts with Choctaw Indians. 

While at Poteau I learned that a colored man named Robert L. 
Fortune, of Wilburton, Okla., had been soliciting contracts for 
Crews & Cantwell from Choctaw freedmen residing in the vicinity 
of Poteau, and I obtained from Mr. Felix Bird, a notary public of 
Poteau, one of the contracts, which said Fortune had left with the 
uotary for acknowledgment when the freedman represented therein 
appeared to execute it, and after concluding my business at Poteau 
I proceeded to Wilburton. where I met said Ribert L. Fortune and 
interrogated him with reference to the matter. 

Siiid Robert L. Fortune resides in the town of Wilburton, Okla., 
and bears a good reputation in the community. He stated to me 
that he is 48 years of age> and was for 16 years, terminating in 1906, 
a deputy United States marshal for the eastern district of Indian 
Territory, now a part of Oklalioma, and that about three years ago 
lie was employed by a negro lawyer, named J. Milton Turner, to 
canvass certain localities in eastern Oklahoma and procure contracts 
from Choctaw freedmen for Crews & Cantwell, of St. Louis. Mo,; 
that said Turner employed two other colored men as subagents 
in this work, whose names were J. E. Eubanks and H. A. Guess, 
respectively, and that Turner, in directing the woi'k, maintained 
an office first at McAlester, Okla.. and subsequently at Fort Smith, 



24 EXKOLLMEXT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Ark. ; that he ( Fortune) procured about 700 contracts for Crews & 
Cantwoll from Choctaw freednien, inchuling- mmors. but took no 
contracts froui minors except when executed by legal guardians; 
that he delivered all of the contracts thu.s procured by him to J. 
Milton Turner, who paid him $1.25 for each dul}'^ executed contract 
delivered, and that the contract provided for a 35 per cent contingent 
fee to Crews & Cantwell. 

Said Kobert L. Fortune stated that in no instance while engaged 
in this work did he represent himself as a Government official, but 
invari:d)]y as a subagent of J. Mihon Turner, in procuring contracts 
for Crews & Cantwell, of St. Louis, Mo.; that H. A. Guess, another 
of Turner's subagents, who Avas a negro attorney, then residing at 
McAlester, Okla., was given a much larger and better territory to 
operate in than that assigned to him by Turner, in consequence of 
which, as stated by Fortune, Subagent Guess procured about double 
the number of contracts that he (Fortune) obtained, and which, with 
the contracts procured by J. E. Eubanks, another of Turner's sub- 
agents, a colored man, and said to be a lawyer, Avhose field of opera- 
tion was in the southeastern part of Oklahoma and adjoining terri- 
tory in Arkansas, and Fortune stated, as an estimate, that about 2,?>00 
contracts were obtained for Crews & Cantwell from Choctaw f reed- 
men by himself and the two other subagents operating under the 
direction of said J. Milton Turner. 

On the 23d ultimo I called upon Mr. Harris Masterson, attorney 
at law, at his office in the Chronicle Building, Houston, Tex., and 
had a very pleasant interview with him relative to his connection with 
certain attoi-nevs engaged in prosecuting ]Mississippi-Choctaw Indian 
claims, and he was exceedingly courteous throughout our conference. 

Mr. Masterson is a very affable gentleman and stated quite freely 
his interest in the claims handled by Crews & Cantwell, in which he 
said he became interested by having the case presented and explained 
to him by Mr. S. L. Hurlbut, of El Campo, Tex., and that after 
investigating the u\atter he concluded to go in on it as a speculative 
investment, and that he took an active part in promoting the organ- 
ization of the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co. to finance the project. 

The organization of said company and financing of the project is 
set forth on pages 12 and 13 of this report, based upon the statements 
of Mr. Masterson to me with reference thereto. 

Mr. Masterson further stated that he also promoted the raising of 
a fund for Attorney Albert J. Lee, of Ardmore, Okla., to enable him 
to continue the prosecution of certain Choctaw-Chickasaw Indian 
claims that are being handled by Ballinger & Lee, which do not con- 
flict with those handled by Crews & Cantwell. 

Luke W, Conerly, of Gulfport, Miss., being frequently referred to 
in the communications contained in the file of papers furnished me 
by the Indian Office for use in my investigation, and his name ap- 
pearing in the correspondence as an active solicitor in obtaining 
contracts from Mississippi Choctaws, therefore I proceeded to Gulf- 
port, Miss., to meet him. 

I reached Gulfport the afternoon of the 27th ultimo, and learning 
that Mr. Conerly lived out in the country about 3 miles from Gulf- 
port, I got into tele])hone comnnniication with him and he imme- 
diatelv <^ame in to meet me at the Great Southern Hotel where we 



ENEOLLMEXT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 25 

wore over 3 hours in conference, and he returned about 9 o'clock the 
follov\4no" morning, accompanied b}^ Henry Wilson and Carl Wilson, 
two prominent members of the iMississippi-Choctaws, and remained 
until near noon discussing Choctaw matters generally and A. P. 
Powell particularly. 

The said Luke W. Conerly is 73 years of age and a lawyer by pro- 
fession, but has not practiced in the courts for several years past. 
He is quite intelligent, bears a good nane in the community, and is 
well spoken of by those who know him. Pie claims to be a lineal 
descendant of one of the leading Choctaw families who participated 
in the Dancing Rabbit Creek treaty of 1830, and stated that he is 
now regarded by all the Choctaws living outside of Oklahoma as 
their captain and recognized leader; also that it was he who first 
interested Congressman Harrison, of Mississippi, in Choctaw matters 
and got him to introduce the bill for reopening the Choctaw rolls; 
that he had interested United States Senators Williams and Varda- 
man, of Mississippi, in the Choctaw claim; also Congressman Mor- 
gan, of Louisiana, in whose district many Choctaws reside. 

I had a very pleasant interview with Harry Wilson, president 
chief council. Society of Mississippi Choctaws, together with his son. 
Pearl L. Wilson, secretary of said council, both of whon reside in 
Gulfport. Miss., and they corroborated substantially the statements 
of Luke AV. Conerly regarding Mississippi Choctaw matters. 

Mr. Conerly stated that he assisted A. P. Powell in writing up 
contracts with Mississippi Choctaws in 1910, when Powell was 
working on a salary for Crews & Cantwell, and that again in March, 
1911, he commenced assisting Powell in writing up contracts for 
W. B. Matthews, an attorney of Washington, D. C. and for whom 
Powell procured 2.258 contracts and liad charged the claimants 
$2.50 each for executing. He further stated that he was in Wash- 
ington, D. C. in February, 1912, and suggested to Mr. Cantwell, 
who was also in Washington, the advisability of Crews & Cantwell 
purchasing the Matthews contracts, as Mr. Matthews had never 
done anything toward furthering the Choctaw case l>efore the com- 
mittees of Congress or elsewhere, and that Mr. Cantwell was so 
favorably impressed with the pro]50sition that he authorized him 
(Conerly) to call upon Attorney Matthews and endeavor to bring 
about a transfer of his contracts to Crews & Cantwell, which he 
(Conerly) proceeded to carry out, resulting in Mr. Matthews trans- 
ferring the 2.258 contracts that were procured in his name to Crews 
& Cantwell for a cash consideration of $1,300, together with Mr. 
Matthews retaining a certain per cent interest in the contingent fee 
provided in the contracts, and that he (Conerly) supervised the legal 
transfer of said contracts from jNIatthews to Crews & Cantwell and 
carried tliem from Mr. Matthews' office in the Bond Building to 
Crews & Cantwell's office, then in the Munsey Building. 

Mr. Conerly further stated that A. P. Powell in his deal with 
W B. INIatthews was to receive a certain per cent of the contingent 
fee provided in the contracts, and in order to eliminate Powell, and 
that he would have no further interest in these 2,258 contracts, Mr. 
Cantwell paid Powell $300 in cash; this payment to Powell, as stated 
by Mr. Conerly, was that he might thus be gotten rid of in a friendly 
way and wnth the understanding that he (Powell) was not to re- 



26 EXROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

turn to Mississippi to engage in soliciting contracts with Choctaw or 
Chickasaw chiiniants. 

Mr. Conerl^y stated that he was then engaged by Crews & Cant- 
well to procure conti'acts for them, and that arrangements were sub- 
sequently made by which Powell assisted him for a time, and that 
during 1912 and early part of 1913 he (assisted by Powell) pro- 
cured about 1,300 contracts for Crews & Cantwell and turned the 
same in to them; that Powell then commenced taking contracts in 
his own name, and his present whereabouts are unknown to Conerly. 

Mr, Conerly still further stated that since March. 1913. lie has been 
in the employ of Mr. T. B. Crews, of the firm of Crews & Cantwell, 
in procuring Choctaw contracts, and had on the 28th ultimo about 
1.800 executed contracts all indexed and ready to turn in, thus ap- 
proximating about 9,558 of this class of contracts controlled by 
Crews & Cantwell, apart from any they may have obtained through 
jjarties whom he (Conerly) has no knowledge. To the above-stated 
total may be added the 2.300 Freedrnen contracts as estimated by 
Robert L. Fortune, of Wilburton, Okla., who was one of the solic- 
itors obtaining contracts from Freedrnen for Crews & Cantwell. 

Mr. Conerly stated to me that he had obtained contracts from 
Mississippi C'hoctaws residing in 15 different States and that there 
are now so many influential persons interested in this claim that 
he has great hope of the early enactment of legislation directing 
the reopening of the Choctaw and Chickasaw rolls. 

With reference to the representations made and methods adopted 
by A. P. Powell in obtaining contracts from Mississippi Choctaw 
applicants Mr. Conerly stated that he had been associated with 
Powell at intervals, from 1910 to the early part of 1913, in writing up 
contracts for Choctaw claimants, and that during all that period he 
had never heard Powell represent himself as a Government official; 
on the contrary, had often heard him tell applicants that he was in 
no way connected with the Government, but that the impression pre- 
vailed among the people in general that Powell represented some 
high authority in canvassing for and executing the contracts he was 
obtaining: that he never heard Powell state that he was a lawyer, 
but knows that the impression prevailed in general that he was an 
attorney. 

Mr. Conerly stated that he has not met Powell during the past 
year and did not know where he is at the present time, but^iad heard 
that he is still engaged in soliciting contracts from Choctaw claim- 
ants, taking the contracts in his own name on a 20 per cent con- 
tingent fee and charging each applicant $2.50 for executing their 
papers, and he (Conerly) expressed the belief that PoAvell has 
realized several thousand dollars through the $2.50 fee invariably re- 
ceived by him from each of the many claimants from whom he 
obtained contracts since severing his connection with Crews Sz Cant- 
well in 1911. 

]Mr. Conerly remarked with reference to A. P. PoAvell that he re- 
garded him as a shrewd individual who made a good impression upon 
persons meeting him casually, but that from having acquired a very 
thorough knowledge of Powell's characteristics, he^ Conerly) would 
not wish to he associated with him in any business transaction. 

As pertinent in the premises. I transmit herewith as " Exhibit 
B " copy cf statement of said Luke W. Conerly, made under oath to 



ENEOLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 27 

Special Indian Agent W. W. McConihe at Jackson, Miss., on April 
26, 1911; the original of which I submitted to Mr. Conerly at Gulf- 
port, Miss., on the 28th ultimo and which he verified as true and a 
correct statement of matters therein referred to up to the time the 
said statement was made and sworn to by him. 

There is also transmitted herewith as " Exhibit C " letter of Luke 
^y. Conerly. of Gulfport, Miss., addressed to me under date of I7th 
instant, to which is attached a printed circular of Crews & Cantwell, 
date Februar}' 16, 1912, accompanied by printed copj'' of an affidavit 
of A. P. Powell, dated November 6, 1911, which has reference to 
the discontinuance of A. P. Powell by Crews & Cantwell and the 
employment by them of said Mr. Conerly to continue the work of 
procuring contracts from Choctaw claimants Avho desired to be rep- 
resented b}^ Crews & Cantwell. 

I also transmit, as " Exhibit D," copy of affidavit of .aid A. P. 
Powell, acknowledged at Jackson, Miss., by W. W. McConihe, special 
United States Indian agent, on April 27, 1911, wherein Powell states 
that he took about 4,000 applications and made no charge for them, 
after which he charged applicants $1.2.5 each; that he made this 
charge because the money that had been advanced by Crews. Cantwell 
& Hurlbut was exhausted ; that he sent all these claims lie was making 
a charge for to Crews & Cantwell ; that he took about 100 applications 
at Monticello, Miss., for Crews & Cantwell and charged ^2. .50 each 
there ; that he took a few names at Biloxi, Miss., and cliarged $1.25 
for each applicant there, and that these claims were for Crews & 
Cantwell; that he also visited Meridian, Miss.; and took about 88 
applications there for Crews & Cantwell, but for which no charge 
was made; and that he had taken no applications for Crews & Cant- 
well after his association with Matthews (meaning Attornev W. B. 
Matthews, of Washington. D. C). 

From the foregoing statements of Powell in his said affidavit he 
doubtless took contracts for Crews & Cantwell from approximately 
4.200 claimants, as stated on page 13 of this report, and also as shown 
on page 14 hereof, by copj^ of Mr. C. B. Moling's letter of June 12, 
1911, to Hon. W. L. Dechant, of Middletown, Ohio, which, with 
the 2,258 contracts taken by Powell for W. B. Matthews and sub- 
sequently transferred to Crews & Cantwell, and as stated by Luke W. 
Conerly"^ (assisted by Powell), 1,?>00 turned into Crews & Cantwell 
during 1912 and early part of 1913 (see p. 37 of this reports together 
with about 1,800 additional contracts which Mr. Conerly has re- 
cently procured and read,y to turn in to Mr. Crews (see also p. 3T 
of this report), approximates 9,558 of this class of contracts on a 
30 per cent contingent fee, controlled by Crews & Cantwell and their 
associates of the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co., and which, with 
about 2,300 contracts obtained for Crews & Cantwell from freedmen 
on a 35 per cent contingent fee. as stated by Eobert L. Fortune (see 
pp. 30-32 of this report), brings the number of claimants repre- 
sented by them up to 11.858, approximately. 

I transmit herewith five forms of blanks used in executing these 
contracts, " Exhibit E " being the form used by A. P. Powell in pro- 
curing contracts for Crews & Cantwell while working on a salary 
for them. " Exhibit F " was the form used by said Powell while 
procuring contracts for ^Y. B. Matthews. " Exhibit G " is the form 



28 ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

now being used by A. P. PoAvell in taking;? contracts in his own name. 
" Exhibit H " is the form used by Luke W. Conerly in writing up 
contracts for T. B. Crews. " Exhibit I " was the form used by the 
throe subagent^ of J. Milton Turner in ]3rocuring contracts from 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Freedmen for Crews & Cantwell, and " Ex- 
hibit J '' contains copies of five notices ciiculated by A. P. Powell in 
soliciting contracts ; also specially prepared press dispatches for dis- 
tribution, with the evident object of thus arousing enthusiasm in the 
Mississippi Choctaw matter. 

In conclusion I desire to state that from a careful perusal of 
the numerous letters of claimants, from whom A. P. Powell had 
obtained contracts, seeking information with reference thereto, as 
contained in the file of papers furnished me by the Indian Office for 
reference in this investigation, together with my having interrogated 
numerous persons as to the representations made to claimants by 
Powell and other solicitors, it appears that Powell did not represent 
himself as an official of the Government nor of the Choctaw Nation, 
and thus therefore avoided violating the statutes in that respect, not- 
withstanding which, as stated by many persons, the impression un- 
doubtedly prevailed, especially among the more ignorant, that he 
was a lawj'er and represented the Government in some manner in 
soliciting contracts from Choctaw claimants. 

Many persons whom I interrogated regarding the matter asserted 
that PoAvell had invariably denied being in any way connected with 
the Government, and Avas only endeavoring to get the rolls reopened 
that the unenrolled Choctaws might receive their rightful shares, 
which, as stated by him, would be 320 acres of land and about $2,500 
in cash to each claimant, less 30 per cent contingent fee to the 
attorneys. 

I return herewith the file of papers furnished me by the Indian 
Office for reference in this investigation. 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

James McLaughlin, 

Inspecto7\ 



Exhibit A. 



[S. L. rinrllmt, presidt'iit : L. II. Beal, secretary. Alfalfa, com, oats, cotton, rice, cane, 

and truck lands.] 

Gulf Coast Land & Investment Co.. 

State Bank Building, 
El Campo, Tex., March 8, 1011. 
A. P. Powell, 

Bay St. Louis, 2Iiss. 
Deak Sir: Your letter addressed to Mr. Hurlbut, under date of March 6, 
has just reached us. and as Mr. Hurlbut is away from the office at this time 
and as you seem to have a wrong idea of the amount that has been spent for 
contracts, or ratlu^r for the actual expense of taking contracts up to the pres- 
ent time, we think it advisable to supply you with the figures, as shown on our 
books, for the money already paid out for field work, for the actual expense 
of taking the contracts, not to say anything of that used by Crews & Cantwell, 
In getting ready for proving up. 

Powell has received, to cover expen.ses, to date $2,006.02 

Powell has received salary for taking contracts 900.00 

IJickols has received for helping in taking Oklahoma contracts 12.",. 00 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 29 

Turner hns receiveti fur liclpiug in t;;kinj.'; Okluliouia coiitracts .^1(55. 00 

Hurlbut lias been to an expense in going to Oklahoma and taking 
contracts there 327.00 

Or there has been a total spent on t.-.king contracts of 3, 523. 02 

So yon will see that, instead of as yon say. when you make the statement 
that you have used only $1,800 yourself you have really used .$2.90(5.02, and 
Ihis does not include the ,$G.5 given you liy Cantwell while you wei'e in Wash- 
ington the last time. And you will see by this that ^Ir. Hurlbut w.is exactly 
right when he stated that about $7,000 has already been spent. 

Mv. Hurlbut will no doubt answer the pjtrt of your letter whei'e you refer 
to his piiying you $122 when he returns to the office, and I think this matter 
will be fixed up between you and him in a satisfactory manner, as he wishes 
to do exactly what is right by you. 
Yours, very truly, 

L. S. IIiRi.riUT. 
PerL. II. I'.EAL. 



STATEMENT OF JIR. LUKE WARD CONERLY. 

Mr. Luke Ward Conerly, of Gulfport. Miss., station "A." made the following 
statement to Special Agent McConihe at Jackson, Miss., Ai)rll 2G, j911. under 
oath : 

I know A. P. Powell. He is engaged in writing up Choctaw claims in Mis- 
sissippi. I am working with Mr. Powell now. Have been with him at Tyler- 
town. Pike County. Bny St. Louis, and I am now engaged at McComb City, Pike 
County. I was not with him all the time at Bay St. Louis. I have been pres- 
ent when large numbers of persons appeared before ^Ir. Powell, and I never 
heard him sny he was a Government official or agent, or make any statement 
that could lead others to think so. 

I met Powell about .Inly and asked him what he was doing, and he said he 
was getting up claims for Mississipin Choctnws luider the treaty of 1830. I 
understood that he hiul been before Congi-ess with the chiims. He said that 
Crews & Cantwell were getting up the claims to present to Congress, the courts, 
or the department. Powell said he was getting the claims for that firm. I 
do not know what he gets out of it. I have never heard Powell stty that he 
was representing the Government, nor have I ever heard anyone say that they 
heard or was told by Powell that he was a United States official, or was repre- 
senting the Government. At Bay St. Louis he was making no charges at first 
for his work. Powell required every applicant to show up his ancestry. 

At Bay St. Louis he ran out of blanks and had some more printed, and after- 
wards charged them $1.25. including notary fee. Powell sent me to Tylertown 
to work thei-e getting up claims, and I made a charge of $2..50 for each appli- 
cation written up and paid him $1 for blanks. I wrote up about 150 applica- 
tions. The charge was to cover expenses. I represented to the i)eoiile that 
they were entitled to ])ut in claims against the Government under the provi- 
sions of the treaty of 1830, subject to such legislation by Congress as might 
be determined, and that they would have to enter into a contract if they wanted 
lo put in a chiim on a 30 per cent contingent fee, as shown by the' contract 
with Crews & Cantwell. who were the lawyers having charge "of the matter.' 
who would present the cl;iims to Congress. I have been at McComb City work- 
ing up claims since March 21. and making a charge of $2. .TO for each jipjilica- 
tion. I pay Powell $1 for a set of bliinks of two, and keej) $1.25 and pay the 
notary 25 cents. I am taking all these applications in the naanie of William B. 
Mathews, of Washington. I). C. Last December 19 I closed at Tylertown and 
went to Bay St. Louis and brouglit him all the applications I had left. These 
were the last I wrote up for Crews & Cantwell. I wrote no more after that 
until about March 13. when I met him at Columbia, wliere he was writing up 
claims for W. B. .Mathews. He .gave me to understand that he no longer rejire- 
sented Crews & Cantwell. but gave me no reason for the change. He gave me 
100 sets of blanks to take to McComb and oi>en an office there. Our agreement 
was that I should write 25 clain)s and send them to him with the $25. T have 
sent him 50 contracts and $50. I was not at Jackson with Mr. I'owell. I made 



30 EXKOLLMEKT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

$1.25 on each application at McComl). I tell the people this is for luy expenses. 
I certify that the above statement was made to me nnder oath. 

W. W. :\IcCoNiHK, 

Special Indian Agent. 



Exhibit C. 



GuLFPOHT, Miss., June 11, IdlJf. 



Alaj. James McLaughlin, 

Ini^pcctor, Indian Office, Washington, D. C. 

Dear Sir: While yon were in Gnlfport I promised yon I would send yon a 
circnlar sent out by Crews & Cantwell from Washington in reference to A. P. 
I'owoll and also my employment by them in February, 1912. You will note that 
during the engagement of myself by Crews & Cantwell in which Mr. Mastersou 
was concerned I was forbidden to charge e\en a notary fee against those who 
appeared before me. 

Mr. Masterson refusing, after the 1st of February, 1913, to furnish any more 
money to cover my expenses, I took contracts during that month for that firm 
at my own expense. After February, 1913, say 1st of March, 1913, I entered 
into an agreement with Thomas B. Crews to take contracts in his name, he 
to cover my expenses, except I reserved the right under the [Mississippi laws to 
charge my notary fee of 50 cents each against those able to pay, and I have 
made it a rule not to charge a widow or a woman dependent on her own re- 
sources for a support, nor a cripple, nor any one else not able to pay the 50 
cents notary fee. 

Not being allowed any traveling money in 1912 by Crews & Cantwell and 
Mr. Masterson, in some instances, in order to save the expense of coming to 
Gulfiiort. where there were groups of claimants, they volunteered to cover my 
expenses to their neighborhoods and return. In no instance whatever have I 
made a charge against persons putting in claims through me; neither have I 
appointed any subagent, nor allowed anyone, if I could help it, to charge for 
making out proof and contracts for others where I furnished the blanks, but 
I can not say this was not done in some instances without my knowledge. 

I have always been careful to explain the situation of our case before the 
Committee of Indian Affairs, as I was present at the opening of the case before 
the subcommittee, February, 1912, and understood the situation, and have tried 
to impress upon the minds of all that the rolls could not be opened ; nor could 
the Secretary of Interior do anything without the enactment of a law to author- 
ize it: and especially have I urged people not to annoy the Interior Department, 
nor our lawyers and Congressmen, with letters — to be patient and wait. 

So anxious have our people been to get their claims in and to secure their 
rights that they would willingly have paid me a cash fee for the work of getting 
up their ancestral records and proof and preparing their papers for their 
attorneys, and I could have reaped thousands of dollars in the last two years; 
but, instead. I have expended a thousand dollars of my own earnings going to 
them to do the work for them free of charge, besides money furnishetl me by my 
associates and employers. Crews & Cantwell. Knowing the hard contest before 
us in Congress on account of powerful opposition. I was opposed to the charge 
of a petty fee against the claimants when their attorneys were doing their 
work for a contingent fee sub.iect to modification and approval of the Secretary. 
By a special arrangement with Mr. Cantwell and also with Thomas B. Crews, 
I own a number of contracts in my own right, taken in the name of Crews & 
Cantwell. and I am trying, and have been all the time, to conform to my instruc- 
tions from them as outlined in the circular inclosed sent out by them in 
February. 1912. 

Yours, sincerely and truly, Luke W. Conerlt. 



Office of Crews »& Cantwell, 420 Munsey Building, 

Washington, D. C, Fchrnary 16, 1912. 
To the Mississipjn Choctatvs: 

We inclose herewith a copy of an affidavit made by A. P. Powell which 
explains itself. The occasion for sending this affidavit to yon and for the 
statement which follows arises by reason of the fact that all relations between 
A. P. Powell and the firm of Crews & Cantwell are now severed. 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 31 

A short history of our relations with him may not be improper. In the 
mouth of May. 1010, Mr. Cantwell had some business before the Committee on 
Indian Affairs with relation to citizenship claims In the Choctaw-Chickasaw 
Tribe, and made an argument before the committee on that day. At the con- 
clusion of his argument Powell made to the committee a stntement of his 
claim as a Mississippi Choctaw. (A copy of the statement of Mr. Powell made 
at that time, is herewith inclosed for your information.) Mr. Cantwell had 
had no occasion to investigate the claims of the Mississippi Choclaws prior to 
that time, but upon a casual examination of the matter he became impressed 
with the idea that there was much more foundation for the claim of rights of 
the Mississippi Choctaws than had been stated by ]Mr. Powell before the com- 
mittee, and upon a full investigation he became convinced that the claim of 
rights of the Mississippi Choctaws was well founded, iuid thereupon our firm 
employed Powell upon a salary to go to Mississippi and secure contracts for 
us and in our name as attorneys to represent the claimants. Powell gave us 
to understand at that time that the number of claimants would be about 
2,000, and the money was provided for all the expense of taking that number 
of contract.s. There were many more claimants than we were led to believe 
existed, and after nearly 3,000 contracts had been taken, the money provided 
for that purpose became exhausted. Mr. Cantwell requestetl Powell, who was 
then in Washington, to return to Mississippi, and stop the work of taking 
contracts until arrangements could be provided for funds to pay the expenses 
of taking more contracts, and Powell was paid his expenses to return to Missis- 
sippi. Powell at that time suggested to Mr. Cantwell tliat the claimants would 
pay the expenses themselves, but as no bill had been introduced for the relief 
of the Mississippi Choctaws and as it was uncertain at that time whether any 
legislation would be enacted. Mr. Cantwell felt that to charge claimants for 
making out the papers, or to permit them to pay the cost of doing so, might 
cause the enemies of the Mississippi Choctaws to designate the efforts to get 
them together as a scheme of graft for these fees, and our firm was not 
willing to have the cause injured by permitting any occasion for such charges. 
Powell then went to Mr. W. B. Matthews, a lawyer of Washington, D. C, 
and represented to Mr. Matthews that there were a large number of claimants 
in Mississippi who were willing to pay for writing up their contracts, provided 
they could get a lawyer to represent them. Mr. Matthews consented to repre- 
sent them in the event that Powell could secure the contracts, and quite a num- 
ber of contracts were taken by Powell in the name of W. B. Matthews under 
this arrangement, the claimants paying a fee for writing the contracts. The 
firm of Crews & Cantwell had absolutely no connection with this whatever, 
and during all this period Powell was not in our employ and not in any wise 
connected with us. During all this time, however — that is, while Powell was 
taking contracts for :Mr. Matthews — no contracts were taken for us or in our 
name, although we were doing all the work of preparing the law governing the 
case of the Mississippi Choctaws. Powell had up to this time still ret.nned a 
contingent interest in the fee which might be eventually recovered by us, and 
desiring to eliminate him from all connection with our contracts, he was paid 
the sum of $2,400 in cash and he then relinquished all interest, contingent or 
otherwise, in the contracts which he had secured for us. This payment was 
in addition to the sum of $150 per month and his expenses, which had been 
fully paid him during the time he was taking contracts for us. Later, that is. 
within the last two months, Mr. Matthews, having then investigated the mat- 
ter, became convinced that we were in a better position to present the case of 
the Mississippi Choctaws and to handle their interests than anyone else, trans- 
feri"ed all the contracts which had been secured in his name to us and sub- 
stituted our names as attorneys in accordance with tlie power given him by 
each individual contract. 

From the beginning of this work we have been entirely willing to give 
Powell all the credit to which he may be entitled by reason of the fact that, 
without knowing upon what legal ground the rights of the Mississippi Choc- 
taws depended, he remained in Washington almost friendless and alone (up 
to the time that he met Mr. Cantwell), insisting that he, as a Mississippi Choc- 
taw, had some rights which luid been disregarded. We have always regarded 
Powell as the instrument of Providence in keeping alive the claim of at least 
one Mississippi Choctaw after the closing of the rolls in 3907 up to the time 
when the work was commencetl at our expense in Mississippi. For his energy 
after his return to Mississippi in keeping up the interest of the people there 
in their rights (although he was paid therefor a mncli biglu>r s.ilnry thin he 



32 ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

had ever earned before iu his life), we have always beeu willing to conce<le 
him full credit and honor. Unfortunately, however, Powell now seems to have 
the impression that he is a lawyer, that he should direct this campaign, and 
he has been particularly restless and sensitive about the few mild criticisms 
which we have indulged in regarding certain misrepresentations which he had 
iguorantly made to the people in Mississippi. 

Some two v. eeks ago we engaged Powell ni)on a salary to go back to ?klissls- 
sippi to assist Mr. Luke Vi. Conerly, of Gulfport. Miss., in taking such con- 
tracts as migiu .still be obtainable from claimants, with the express provision 
that Powell juhI Conerly should be p.-iid a salary and that no charge should 
he n;ade the claimants. While we do not regard it as anything improper for 
the claimants to pay the expenses necessarily incident to making contracts for 
the protection of their rights, yet. having defrayed all the expenses of taking 
contracts for us before i.nd desiring to prevent any refle<:'tion upon the agita- 
tion for those rights as being a means by which a petty profit might be made, 
we have steadily opposed the idea of taking any contracts except at our own 
expense. 

A telegram has .lust been received from Powell in Mississippi say that "Our 
deal is ofl'."' Owing to his peculiar impulsive disposition, we are led to fear that 
he may be indulging in some misrepresentation as to what is now beng done 
in Washington and that he contemplates some arrangement by which he may 
continue to charge claimants for taking their contracts as he had heretofore 
done with the Matthews contracts. 

We desire to say to the claimants that a, bill for their full and adequate 
relief has been introduced iu the lower House by Mr. Harrison, of Mississippi ; 
that all the members of the Mississippi delegation and Mr. Wickliffe, of Louisi- 
ana, ai'e enthusiastically supporting the bill; and that Congressman Harrison 
and Mr. Cantwell are now engaged in making arguments before the Subcom- 
mittee on Indian AltV.irs in Congress, making a lull i)resentati()n of the case, 
and that evt-rything is being done that can be done for the relief of these 
claimants. 

Mr. Luke W. Conerly. of Gulfport, Miss., who is him.self a Mississippi Choc- 
taw claimant, will return to 2-Iississippi from Washington in a few days, and 
any of your friends or relatives who are not now represented by us who 
desire attorneys to represent them may procure blank contracts and blank 
memoranda of evidence from Mr. Conerly. All those who apply to him at Gulf- 
port. Miss., will have the memorandum of their evidence filled and the con- 
triicts i)repared and a.cknowledged without charge, and upon giving him the 
preliminary information by mail, the papers will be prepared by him and re- 
turned to you at your home in the event that you can not get to Gulfport. In 
case the papers are acknowledged at your own home, however, the claimant 
would be expected to i)ay the notary fee. which in any event would not be 
more than 00 cents. 

We repeat we hijve never had any desire to take away from Powell the 
credit for whatever work he has done. He is in the habit of looking upon hinv 
self as the "father" of the Mississippi Choctaws. We have been reliably in- 
formed that Powell has heretofore represented throughout Mississippi that he 
was the attorney who jiresented this matter before Congress. In order to 
gratify his vanity we bad insertetl in the first contracts a recognition of Pow- 
ell's services, but the copy of the statement and the only statement which 
Powell ha.s ever made before any committee of Congress, is herewith inclosed, 
from which each claimant can easily determine for himself that if the rights of 
the Mississii)pi Choctaws had depended upon Powell's efforts alone, they would 
not have gotten very far toward being recognized. The statement itself shows 
that Powell did nothing except call attention to his own claim, and a compari- 
son of his statement with the voluminous brief of Mr. Cantwell shows how 
imperfectly even his own rights were statetL Whatever Mr. Powell may do 
can not affect the rights of the claimants. Their rights will be fully i)rotected 
in any event, and this letter is sent you only for the purpose of thoroughly 
acquainting you with the situation in order to prevent the possibility of any 
wrong impression being created in regard to your claim. 

Crews & Cantwell. 

State of Missouki, City of St. Louis, ss. 

A. P. Powell, upon his oath, deposes and says: 

That in the month of May, 1910, at the city of Washington, D. C, he was 
employed by the firm of Crews & Cantwell to secure contracts for them for 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 33 

their employujent as attorneys by persons claiming rights as Mississippi Choc- 
taws under the treaty of 1830; that his instructions from Mr. Cantwell were to 
write the contract of uo person who was not a bona fide claimant under said 
treaty, and to write contracts with no person except those who had record or 
evidence by tradition of their pedigree as a descendant of a person entitled 
to lands under the treaty of 1S30; that he was paid a salary of $150 per month, 
and all of his expenses, and had a contract for a contingent interest in the 
fees that might be recovered by Crews & Cantwell; that all of the expenses of 
securing about 3,800 contracts, including the acknowledgments, were paid by 
the firm of Crews & Cantwell, and that no charges were made by him against 
any of the claimants for any of his services in writing contracts for Crews & 
Cantwell; that after Crews ik. Cantwell stopped taking contracts, the affiant 
was besieged by other persons who had had no opportunity, up to that time, to 
have their contracts written, and that affiant, upon his own responsibility, took 
contracts with about 300 persons, in the name of Crews & Cantwell, charging 
the applicants a fee of $1.50 for each contract; that after communicating to 
the firm of Crews & Cantwell the fact that these last 300 had been taken for 
which this charge had been made, Mr. Cantwell first declared that as they 
had made no charges for the other contracts, they did not want these contracts 
at all, but realizing that this would put the claimants in a bad position and that 
their rights might be neglected, the contracts were finally accepted by Crews 
& Cantwell; that Mr. Cantwell instructed this affiant 'to return the $1.50 
charge made by this affiant, and that Crews & Cantwell then paid this affiant 
his expenses, while taking these last-mentioned contracts. 

That over 3,800 contracts had been taken prior to that time, for which no 
charges had been made; that under no circumstances and at no time did Crews 
& Cantwell, or any one of them, authorize or request that any contracts be 
taken for which a charge should be made, and that the only contracts taken in 
their name for which charges were made, were as above detailed and under the 
above circumstances, which was after Crews & Cantwell had notified this 
affiant that they did not wish to go further on taking contracts. 

That at no time and under no circumstances did Crews & Cantwell, or any- 
one of them, ever instruct this affiant to take the contract of any person who 
did not claim to be a lineal descendant of an Indian entitled to lands under 
the treaty of 1830. 

Affiant further states that he has taken no contracts with full-blood negroes 5 
that until within the last six weeks neither Crews nor Cantwell had any knowl- 
edge of the large number of persons with negro blood in Mississippi claiming 
such rights, although Mr. Cantwell had stated to this affiant that he did not 
regard the presence of negro blood as a sufficient bar to destroy the legal right 
of one who had undoubted Indian blood and is an undoubted descendant of an 
Indian claiming rights uner the treaty of 1830, although Mr. Cantwell had 
stated to this affiant on several occasions that the fact that one had negro blood 
would make it very difficult to establish the heirship. This affiant states that 
out of over 4,000 contracts taken, there are not more than 20 per cent who have 
any negro blood whatever. 

Afiiaut further states that in consideration of the sum of $2,400 paid him in 
cash, he has relinquished and conveyed to Crews & Cantwell all his contingent 
right in the fees in the contracts above referred to, and hereby cancels said con- 
tract ; and that this affiant has no further financial interest in the fees or the 
contracts made in the name of Crews & Cantwell. 

Affiant further states that he has not heretofore assigned his right to a con- 
tingent interest in the fees aforesaid to anyone. 

A. P. Powell. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 6th day of November, 1911. 

(My term expires June 3, 1913.) 

[seal.] Sarah M. Hawley, Notary Public. 



{ 



ExmuiT D. 

Jackson, Miss., April 27, 1911. 

Alex. P. Powell, being first duly sworn by Special United States Indian 
Agent W. W. McConihe, deposes and says as fol'ows: 

I reside at Homer. Okla. My present occupation is getting up claims among 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians and their descendants who remained in 

51402—14 3 



34 ENR'^LLMENT WITH 1 HE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIHES. 

Mississippi after the Dancing lval)l)itt Creek tre.itj- of ISao. I was first em- 
ployed by Crews & Civntwell, of .St. l.onis, Mo. I went before the Committee of 
Indian Affairs ia Congress at Wasliington, April 2, 1910, and they gave me a 
hearing on the (hums of these Indians. Mr. Hariy J. Cantwell was present at 
the hearing, ant'i after I got throngh my talk with the committee Cantwell came 
to me and asked nie how nuich money I wanted to take the claims in Missis- 
sippi. I said it wonld take at least .$5,()00. Cantwell wired S. L. Hulbert, of 
El Campo, Tex., to come to Washington at once. Hulbert came to Washington 
and arranged with Cantwell, and IIull)ert guaranteed to put up $5,000 for get- 
ting the work of the applications. 

I first opened an office at 315 Parish Street, Jackson, Miss., and began to take 
applications. I put an advertisement in the paper at Jackson inviting all per- 
sons who were descendants of the Choctow-Chickasaws under the treaty of 
1830 to appear before me and make proof of their rights and descent. I took 
about 700 applications at Jackson and made no charges to the applicants there- 
for. I next went to Bay St. Louis and opened an otfice there near the railroad 
depot and put an advertisement in the Sea Coast Echo of that city, being the 
same as I put in the papers at other places. I took about 4,000 applications and 
made no charge for them. After the 4,0(X) were registered more applications 
came in and I charged them $1.25 each. I made this charge because the money 
that had been advanced by Crews, Cantwell, and Hulbert was exhausted, 
and they refused to put up any more money for taking applications. This 
charge by me was to cover expenses of continuing the work of getting applica- 
tions. I sent all these claims that I was making a charge for to Crews & 
Cantwell. I went from Bay St. Louis to Washington to see Mr. Cantwell and 
tried to get Hulbert to put up more money and Hulbert notified me at Jackson, 
Miss., that he had put up $7,000, and that we had to take proof of the same, 
and he was willing to put up the $7,000 for that purpose. He has not put it 
up yet. 

We went to Columbia, Miss., and took about 100 applications there. The 
contracts that we wrote there were made in the name of William D. Matthews, 
of Washington, D. C. I have associated myself with Matthews for the reason 
that Crews & Cantwell said that they had enough claims, and that Hulbert 
would not put up any more money for claims. My agreement was made with 
Matthews that he was to appear before the committee of Congress with me, 
and our contract with the applicants was for 20 per cent of all amounts 
recovered and not for 30 per cent as was printed in the contract, which is an 
error and which has been con-ected in the written applications. I went to 
Mouticello and took applications for Crews & Cantwell and charged $2.50 
each there. I took about 100 names there. I took a few names at Biloxi and 
charged $1.25 for each applicant there. These claims were for Crews & Cant- 
well. I also visite<l Meridian and took about 88 applications there for Crews 
& Cantwell, but for which no charge was made. I have taken no applicatlous 
for Crews & Cantwell since my association witli Matthews. 

I am working at Philadelphia, Miss., now and have taken about 100 appli- 
cations for Matthews and am charging $2.50, and the applicants are very will- 
ing to pay the amount. I am making this charge because Matthews has put 
up no money for me and my expenses, and I have to use the money to pay 
for my clerk hire, office rent, and other expenses in connection with the work 
of taking applications. 

Mr. liUke Conerly is employed by me at McComb City, Miss., to get appli- 
cations. He charges each applicant $2.50. I get a dollar out of this $2.50 for 
my expenses and the i>rinting of blanks which I furnish him. I have paid 
expenses of Conerly out of this money when he was traveling, board bill, 
telegraphing, and other incidental expenses he has incurred. 

No one is working for me in Oklahoma or Arkansas. I do not know J. Eu- 
banks, and he is not associated with me in any way in the work I am doing. 

I have never at any time, or to any person, said that I was a Government 
ofiicial in any respect. I have only represented that I am acting and represent- 
ing my people before Congress, and I am getting up these claims for that 
purpose. 

When at Jackson in June, 1910, I had a circular sent out and meant to 
say that I was a representative of my tribe and obtaining applicants for their 
rights as Choctaws and Chickasaws, but by an error my clerk said that I 
was a practicing attorney before the committees of Congress. That was not 
my intention to have it so stated, and I am not responsible for the error. 



ENROLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 35 

The contract forms used by me were worde<l ami made up by Crews and 
Cantwell. and I am not responsible for anything in such wording. 

I, Alec P. Powell, do solemnly swear that the foregoing statement was made 
voluntarily by me. and that it is true in every respect, to the best of my 
knowledge and belief. 

Alexander P. Powelt,. 
Sworn to and subscribed before me. this 27th day of April, 1911, at Jackson, 
Miss. 

W. W. McCONIHE, 
Special United States Indian Agent. 
Frank B. Lemly, Jackson, Miss. 



EXHIIUT E. 
MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAW CONTRACT. 

This agreement, made this 5th day of September, 1910, by and between Louis 
Joseph Ryan, now residing at the town of Biloxi. in the county of Harrison, 
State of Mississippi, party of the first part, and Thomas B. Crews and Harry J. 
Cantwell. .jointly, parties of the second part, witnasseth : 

That, whereas the party of the first part is entitled, as a Mississippi Choctaw 
or as a descendant of a Mississippi Choctaw, under the laws of the United States, 
to certain rights in the distribution of the tribal property of the Choctaw- 
Chiclcasaw Indian Tribe in Oklahoma; and 

Whereas the party of the first part has beeu heretofore denied enrollment or 
has had no opportunity to make application for proper enrollment in said rolls 
as a Mississippi Choctaw: and 

Whereas it is necessary that the party of the first part shall secure the lawful 
professional services of attorneys for the purpose of presenting such evidence 
as the party of the first part may have of his status and right as a Mississippi 
Choctaw or a descendant of a Mississippi Choctaw, so entitled to the rights 
aforesaid, and for other necessary legal services in establishing and securing 
his rights in the premises; and 

Whereas the party of the first part is witliout any means or funds to compen- 
sate such attorneys and counsel; 

Now, therefore, the premises considered, the i^arties of the second part jointly 
agree : 

First. To represent the party of the first part as attorneys and counsel in pre- 
senting to the Interior Department such lawful evidence as the party of the 
first part may collect to establish the facts of his pedigree and status, and such 
other facts as may be necessary to establish the right claimed. 

Second. To represent as attorneys the party of the first part in all legal pro- 
ceedings before any court, commission, or department of the Government of the 
United States or the State of Oklahoma, wherever and whenever sucli right may 
be properly and legally tried. 

Third. To present before the committees of Congress proper legal argument 
in suprx)rt of the right so claimed or in supporl of any measure tending to pro- 
vide a remedy for the right so claimed. 

Fourth. To furnish party of the first part necessary information for the pur- 
pose of enabling him to select to the best advantage any lands that he may be 
entitled to by reason of said right. 

Fiftli. To collect all sums of money, lands, and property that may properly 
be collected, selected, and received hereafter by reason of said right, and to 
faithfully pay over and account to said party of the first part for all such sums 
of money and property after deducting tlie compensation hereinafter pro- 
vide<l for. 

In consideration of tlie premises and the agreement of tlie parties of the 
second part as aforesaid, and of services lieretofore rendered by them, the 
party of the first part contracts and agrees to pay and assign, transfer, and 
convey to the parties of the second part ?>0 per cent of all sums of money, 
lands, and property that may be received by reason of the right claimed, and 
hereby irrevoc;il)ly appoints the parties of tlie second i)art his true and lawful 
attorneys in fact, to do any and all acts in liis name, i)lace, and stead as fully 
and completely as he might do in person in and about (he subject matter of this 
agreement, and to execute such receipts, discharges and releases as the party of 



36 ENKOLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

the first part misht lawfully do, hereby ratifying and confirming all that his 
said attorneys in fact and in law may do in the premises. 

The party of the first part hereby revokes all powers of attorney, if any, here- 
tofore made by him to any person or persons whomsoever, touching said rights 
or interests, and requests that the Interior Department of the United States 
recognize the parties of the second part as his exclusive agents and attorneys 
in the premises. 

And it is hereby specifically agreed that the appointment herein of Thomas B. 
Crews and Harry J. Cantwell is joint, and that in the event of the death of 
either the survivor shall succeed to all rights and benefits of this agreement, 
and shall perform all of the duties hereunder. 

It is further agreed that by reason of the legal services rendered prior to and 
at the signing of this agreement, in advising the party of the first part as to 
his legal rights, and in consideration of the services heretofore rendered by 
A. P. Powell before the committees of Congress in presenting the claims of the 
class of persons to which the party of the first part belongs, said parties of 
the second part having compensated said A. P. Powell therefor, and in further 
consideration of the absolute agreement herein of the parties of the second 
part to perform the services herein, that the powers herein granted are powers 
coupled with an interest; and it is agreed that the parties of the second part 
may jointly designate, substitute, and appoint, in writing, any competent attor- 
ney or attorneys at law to assist in the performance of the duties of the parties 
of the second part hereunder, and to clothe said person or persons with all the 
powers herein granted to the parties of the second part, the parties of the sec- 
ond part hereby guaranteeing the efficiency and integrity of any and all per- 
sons who may be tlius appointed, it being distinctly understood that the com- 
pensation of such persons for such assistance shall not be paid by the party of 
the first part. 

It is further understood and agreed that, in the event it becomes necessary 
under any law now existing or hereafter enacted, that this contract shall be 
approved by the Secretary of the Interior ; then, in that event, the Secretary 
of the Interior may, in his discretion, modify the terms of this contract as to 
the compensation to be paid the parties of the second part, without invalidating 
this contract, and said contract as modified by said Secretary of the Interior 
shall be binding upon the parties hereto, provided always that the compensa- 
tion fixed by the Secretary of the Interior shall in no event exceed the per- 
centage above stated. 

Executed in duplicate. 

In witness whereof the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands the day 
and year first above written. 

Signed and delivered in presence of: 



State of , county of , ss. 

Before me, , a , in and for said county and State, 

on this day of , 191 — , personally appeared and 

. ; to me known to be the identical person who executed the within 

and foregoing instrument, and /icknowledged to me that executed the 

same as free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes 

therein set forth. 

In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand and official seal at said 
county tlie day and year last above written. 



Exhibit J. 

To whom it may concern : 

This is to certify that I, Alexander P. Powell, a representative of the Choc- 
taw Tribe of Indians now engaged in soliciting contracts with ilississippi 
Choctaws for services to be rendered in prosecuting their claim before the 
different branches of the Government, in order to secure for them a reopen- 
ing of the rolls of those entitled to share in the tribal property belonging to 
the Choctaw Tribe in the State of Oklahoma, am acting in my individual 
capacity and for the benefit of myself and those associated with me in 
this effort to secure the right of said Indians in said property. 



ENEOLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 37 

I further certify tliat I am in no manner employed or engaged by the 
United States Government to solicit any contract with said Indians or perform 
any duty in connection therein. 
Respectfully, 

Alexander P. Powell. 



NOTICE TO INDIANS. 

This is your last chance in connection with William B. Mathews, attorney 
at law, Evans Building, Washington, D. C. I am engaged in writing up claims 
of all Mississippi Choctaws and their descendants who remain in Mississippi 
after Dancing Rabbit Creek treaty with the United States Government in 1830. 

I will remain here for a few days only ; I will be glad to write up all bene- 
ficiaries; we intend to submit all claims to the Sixty-second Congress, which 
convenes in Washington, D. C, April 4, 1911. I am Indian and Spaniard, and 
my grandfather was a signer of the great treaty concluded September 27, 1830. 

Alexander P. Powell. 

Philadelphia, Miss. 



NOTICE TO INDIANS AND THEIR DESCENDANTS — IN CONNECTION WITH HON. HAREY 
PEYTON, ROOM 420 BOND BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D. C. 

This is your last chance to secure benefits under the bill Introduced by 
Hon. Pat Harrison, of the sixth district of Mississippi, now pending before 
the Sixty-second Congress, for the relief of Mississippi Choctaws and their 
descendants who remained in Mississippi after the treaty of 1830. 

I am an Indian and a Spaniard and my grandfather was a signer of the 
treaty of 1830. 

I will be glad to write up all beneficiaries, and I have in my possession 
a record that will enable you to trace your ancestors back to 1780, 

Those with negro blood need not apply. 

I will be at Miss., on the ■ day of 1912. 

Alexander P. Powell, 
No. 106 Fourth Avenue, Laurel, Miss. 
Office: Room Ji20, Bond Building, Washington, D. C. 

(This paper was sent to Indian Office by Mrs. Viola Strickland, of Meridian, 
Miss., No. 1400 Tenth Ave., under date of Sept. 16, 1912.) 



THIS IS YOUR LAST CHANCE — NOTICE TO THE ONCE MIGHTY TRIBE OF RED MEN 
WHO ONCE OWNED THIS COUNTRY AND TO THEIR DESCENDANTS. 

In connection with Hon. Harry Peyton, room 408, and Hon. Oliver A. 
Phelps, room 619 Bond Building, Washington, D. C, I am still engaged in 
writing up all Mississippi Choctaws and their descendants who remained in 
Mississippi after the Dancing Rabbit Creek treaty with the United States 
Government, concluded September 27, 1830. 

The treaty of 1830, known as the treaty of "Perpetual friendship," pro- 
vides tliat the Indian Territory shall go to the Red Man and his descendants 
"as long as water runs and grass grows"; the treaty furtbermore provided 
that our descendants that did not see fit to go to the Territory then, at any 
time that they may take a notion to come on and join the tribe in the Territory, 
they shall share in this distribution as long "as water runs and grass grows." 
If your ancestors were born east of the Mississippi River, call on me; it is 
possible tbat some of them may have been at the treaty mentioned above. 

I am an Indian and a Spaniard, and my grandfather, Nita, was a signer 
of the treaty of 1830. 

I have in my possession a record of the old aboriginal that will permit 
you to trace your Indi.in ancestry back as far as 1780. 

.Ml Mississip])! Choctaw cases are now pending before Committee on Indian 
Affairs, Sixty-third Congress, first session, waiting for report and decision. 
I will 1)0 g];i(l to write up all beneficiaries. 



38 ENEOLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Those with negro blood need not apply. 

I will be at W. J. Nelson's. S02 Second Street, Lake Charles. La., on Sep- 
tember 5. 

Alexandeb p. Powbxl. 

notice to mississippi choctaws. 

In connection with Harry J. Cantwell, Thos. L. Crews, and William B. Mat- 
thews, attorneys of Washington, D. C, I am still engaged in writing np claims 
for the Choctaw-Chickasaw Indians and their descendants who remained in 
Mississippi after the Dancing Rabbit Creek treaty with the United States 
Government. I am a member of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians and my grand- 
father was a signer of the great treaty made September 27, 1830. I will be 
glad to communicate with any beneficiary at my office in Bay St. Louis, Miss. 

A. P. Powell, 
Seahrook Hotel, Bay St. Louis, Miss. 



" INDIANS " LIVING IN OLD MISSISSIPPI. 

"All Mississippi Choctaw Indians and their descendants are asked to meet at 
the county courthouse next Sunday afternoon at 2 o'clock. The object of the 
meeting is to further the rights contained in the treaty of 1830 between the 
Unitetl States and Choctaws. (Biloxi Herald.)" 

To which is answered : Such a meeting as is scheduled as per the above 
would be " nuts " for some moving-picture company, provided such meeting is 
attended by all the people who have filed claims as descendents of the tribe 
of red men known as Choctaws. They are of all shades and color, running 
from the real Indian to the coal-black, thick-lipped, flat-nosed, kinky-headed 
negro, with a good sprinkling of whites, in whose veins no one but themselves 
ever suspected that a drop of Indian blood flowed. But anything goes in this 
day and gener.-ition when the thought of "easy money" presents itself. Uncle 
Sam's coffers will scisrcely be opened for the motley crew, however just may 
be the claims of some of the pure-bred Choctaws. (Gulf Coast Progress.) 



HOUSTON INVESTORS MAY GET MILLIONS FROM INDIAN CLAIM. 

A Houston organization, in which more than .$2. .500,000 is at stake and the 
hereditary rights of the Choctaw tribe of Mississippi is the merchandise, has 
received quite a boost in a telegram received by Judge Harris Masterson. 
Many Houstoniaus are interested in the enterprise. The telegram reads as 
follows : 

" Subcommittee i-eport of Friday last was unanimous and recommends ad- 
mission of all full bloods, also all others who can prove descent from one who 
either received or should have received patent under fourteenth article treaty 
of 18.30. .Meetings are extK-utive and no arguments being hejird." 

To those who are not interested in the venture the telegram neotls inter- 
pretation. It comes from Washington and has to do with a bill introduced by 
Mr. Harrison of Mississippi in behalf of the admission to enrollment of the 
Mississippi Choctaw Indians and their descendants to partici]>ation in the 
money and lands helonuing to the Choctaw tribe. 

Some time ago Judge Masterson was instrumental in forming .•in organiza- 
tion to urge the claim of the Choctaw tribe in a particip.ition of certain lands 
in the territories and moneys in the United States Treasury. Many of these 
Indians were his clients. Going rather deeply into the matter he banded over 
4,000 of these claimants together and became their representative and legal 
advisor. 

Money was needed to carry the enterprise through, ami a company was 
formed. Between 50 and GO men came into the company, and many of these 
are prominent Houstonians. 

Judge Masterson says that the venture is one which ])roinises tremendous 
returns for the amount invested by the stockholders, and that he is confident 
Congress will give assent to the recommendation of the subcommittee. 



ENEOLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 39 

WOULD RESTORE CHOCTAW INDIAN PENSION BILLS. 

[Associated Press.] 

Washington, December 13. 

The bill introduced in the House last session by Representative Harrison, 
providing reopening of rolls of the Chickasaw-Choctaw Indian Tribes, came up 
for consideration in the House yesterday. A vote was not reached. In his 
speech in favor of the bill Mr. Harrison said, in part: 

" The Mississippi Choctaws have been woefully neglected and unmercifully 
treated. They acquired rights under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 
1830 that the United States Government has never faiily and .iustly recognized. 
Every act of Congress passed with resi)ect to the Mississippi Choctaws has vio- 
lated the spirit and the letter of that article of the treay. 

" The Oklahoma Choctaws were permitted by act of Congress in ISSl to sue 
the United States Government, in which suit they recovered from the Govern- 
ment $8,000,000 for damages done to the Mississippi Choctaws in Mississippi. 
Scheming attorneys, representing the tribe, dictate agreements, suggest, lobby 
foi-, and have passed laws that not only make it impossible for the Mississippi 
Choctaws to be enrolled upon tribal rolls, but through their influence they have 
actually created courts to prevent or exclude the Mississippi Choctaws from 
being enrolled. One of the blackest spots in the history of the administration 
of the Choctaw Nation is the escapades practiced in the citizenship court. 

"The Mississippi Choctaw is a part of that great Indian nation which never 
i-aised a tomahawk against an American citizen. Thousands of her warriors 
displayed their heroism under Jackson at New Orleans." 



[Alexander P. Powell, representative Mississippi Choctaw Indians ; office, room 408, Bond 
Building. Washington, D. C. ; 331 Pine Street, Laurel, Miss.] 

Shrevepobt, La., Oetobcr 28, 1912. 
Mr, Columbus Overman, 

Dexter, Kans. 
Dear Sir : Yours of recent date to hand. Beg to advise that I have already 
written up a number of your relatives under their great-great-grandmother 
Delilah, who was an Indian woman, and if you wish to be written up, on receipt 
of $2.50, which I require for recording fee, etc., I will send you blanks to be 
filled out. I do not charge you any fee, but when I collect for you I get 20 
per cent of collections. 

I am also inclosing you a Pat Harrison bill and other literature and you can 
see for yourself how the case stands. 

Yours, truly, Alexander P. Powell. 



, WIS. 

Hon. Alexander P. Powell, 

Dear Sib : Being a Choctaw descendant and desiring to make application for 
compensation for the violation of my rights under the treaty of 1S30, between 
the Choctaw Nation and the United States Government, and being unable to go 
to your office for that purjiose, I do hereby request that you come at your 

earliest convenience to . my place of residtMice. for that purpose, and I 

agree to reimburse you the necessary expense of your trip to and from said 
Iilace, provided the same shall not exceed the sum of $2.50. 



Witness : 



MEMORANDUM OF EVIDENCE. 



In the matter of — , Mississippi Choctaws. 

Full name, . 

Post-office address, . 



When and where were you born? . 

Is there any official record of your birth or baptism? If so, state where. 



40 ENEOLLMENT WITH THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 
Father's name, . 



If living, state post-office address. 

If dead, state date and place of his death. 

Mother's maiden name, . 

If living, state post-office address. 



If dead, state date and place of her death. 

When and where were yonr parents married? 

Is there any record of the marriage? If so, state where. 

What was the name of your father's father? 

When did he die, and where? . 

What was the name of your father's mother? 

When and where did she die' 



What was the name of your mother's father? . 

When and where did he die? . 

What was the name of your mother's mother? . 

When and where did she die? . 

What is the name of ancestors who received land or script under the treaty 
of 1830? . 

How can you prove your descent from him or her? . 

Give name and address of all witnesses as to your descent from such ancestor, 
and refer to all church records which can give any information. -. 

Did you ever go to Oklahoma to make application for enrollment on Choctaw 
rolls? ' . 

Have you ever made settlement on any lands in Oklahoma? If so, describe 
same. . 

Where were you denied enrollment? . 



Have you any documents proving your pedigree? Where are they? If so, 

attach or submit them. . 

Are any of your relatives now on the rolls of the Choctaw? 



Give names of friends and neighbors who can testify to any matter of interest 
regarding your pedigree. 



Are any of your relatives now on the rolls of the Choctaw-Chickasaw tribe 
as a Mississippi Choctaw? If so, give names and address and number on roll. 



If you can, give a description of the land your ancestors received in Misis- 
sippi under the treaty of 1830. . 

State of Mississippi, , County of 



being duly sworn upon h — oath, deposes and says that the 
matters and things set forth in the foregoing statement are true to the best 
of h — knowledge and belief. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 191 — . 

, Notary Public. 



Part Six 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 381 

the authorities that I can gather say that full-blood Choctaw means 
nothing more than a full-blood American. 

Mr. Hurley. I would like Mr. Cantwell present when I address 
the committee, because I make some comment concerning the argu- 
ment he has made and the statements he has put forth as facts. 

Mr. Cantwell. Anything you may say will not worry me, Mr. 
Hurley, and I do not care whether I am present or not, unless it is 
something of an attack on my integrity, which 1 reserve the right to 
hold you responsible for somewhere else. If you have nothing of 
that sort to say, I do not care whether I am present or not. 

Mr. Hurley. About the apparent challenge to hold me responsible 
for what I may say, I am responsible and will be prepared to answer 
to you at any place, at any time, and under any circumstances for 
anything I say. I will attack your statement of what you say are 
facts, but which I think are not facts. 

Mr. Cantwell. Those matters can all be verified. Whatever I 
have stated as a fact I have tried to give my authority for. There- 
fore I do not think it is absolutely necessary that I should be here 
when Mr. Hurley makes his statement. 

Mr. Hurley. I thought it was only fair to tell you I think you 
ought to be present. I can not defer my statement any longer. 

Mr. Carter. We will meet to-morrow morning at half past 10 
o'clock to go on with the hearing. 

(Thereupon, at 2.40 o'clock p. m., the committee adjourned to 
meet to-morrow, Thursday, August 6, 1914, at 10.30 o'clock a. m.) 



Subcommittee of Committee on Indian Affairs, 

House or Representatives, 

Thursday, August 6, ,191^- 
The subcommittee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. Charles D. 
Carter (chairman) presiding. . 

STATEMENT OF MR. LTJKE W. COIOilELY, OF GULFPORT, MISS. 

Mr. Conerly. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Cantwell could not be present 
before the committee to-day and requested me to appear to make 
some corrections with reference to the item of contracts in his state- 
ment. There is an item of 4.200 contracts mentioned in his state- 
ment, and that is incorrect He wants that corrected. The fact is 
that it should be approximately 3,800 contracts or approximately 
less than 3,900 contracts. Mr. Cantwell inadvertently got 400 con- 
tracts, it seems, mixed up with that 3,800. It seems that they were 
contracts that were rejected by the Court of Claims and were thrown 
out, and that item was mixed up in his statement with these con- 
tracts, or 3,800 contracts, taken for him in 1910. 

Mr. Carter. T do not know, Mr. Conei'ly, that the difference of 
the 400 contracts is material, but T find here a statement from the 
inspector's report to the effect that there are 4,200 — that he has found 
that there are 4,200 of these contracts. Then I find here a statement 
or letter from Mr. C. B. Moling, of Houston, Tex., to W. I>. Dechant. 



382 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

of Middletown, Ohio, attempting to hypothecate those contracts, in 
which he states that there are 4,200 contracts. He says: 

A reputable and responsible firm of attorneys, with offices in St. Louis and 
Washington, D. C, have secured contracts with 4.200 Choctaw Indians to secure 
them their allotment of lands and money upon a percentage basis. The con- 
tracts provide that the attorneys are to receive 30 per cent of all lands and 
money received. These 4.200 contracts are one signed by the Indian, two wit- 
nesses to his signature, and acknowledged before a notary public. 

Now, that was on June 12, 1911, and it exactly corroborates the 
other evidence that the inspector found with relation to these con- 
tracts. This man Molinoj seems to have been the agent of the Texas- 
Oklahoma Investment Co.. who was tryinff to sell some stock in 
that company, and undoubtedly if the Texas-Oklahoma company had 
contracts he knew how many there were. 

]\Ir. C()NERLY. In explanation of that, Mr. Chairman, I might say 
this: That I worked in Mr. Cantwell's office some 30 or 10 days in the 
early part of 1912, and my knowledge of his office, of the contracts in 
his office at that time — that is, of Mississippi Choctaw contracts 
taken for him — was that there were 3,800, or something over, and I 
will say approximately less than 3,900. 

Mr. Carter. Were vou working in Mr. Cantwell's office on June 12, 
1911? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir. I want to explain right there that those 
400 contracts were evidently mixed up in his calculations in some 
way, but they did not belong to the 3,800 contracts mentioned in his 
report, and he wants that explanation made. 

Mr. Carter. Now, let me read to you what the contracts are. I 
read form page 27, from the third paragraph from the top, as 
follows : 

From the foregoing statements of I'owell in his said affidavit he doubtless 
took contracts for Ci'ews & Cantwell from approximately 4,200 claimants, as 
stated on page 13 of his report, and also as shown on page 14 hereof, by copy of 
C. B. Moling's letter of June 12, 191L to Hon. \V. L. Deohant, of Middletown, 
Ohio, which, with the 2,258 contracts taken by Powell for W. B. ^Matthews 
and subsequently transferred to Crews & Cantwell, iuid as stated by Luke W. 
Conerly (assisted by Powell), 1,300 turned into Crews & Cantwell during 1012 
and the early part of 1913 (see p. 37 of this report), together with about 1,800 
additional conti-aets which Mr. Conerly has recently procured and is ready to 
turn in to Mr. Crews (see also p. 37 of this report), approximates 9,558 of this 
class of contracts on a 30 per cent contingent fee. 

Mr. Conerly. I want to make a statement here in regard to that 
report. The contracts I had taken, mentioned here, for William B. 
Matthews were taken in 1911. 

In 1911 Powell opened his office at Columbia, Miss. That was in 
February, 1911, and he wired me to meet him there. I met him 
there, and he employed me to assist him that year. I assisted him 
in taking these contracts for William B. Matthews, but I was not 
with him. He sent me to McCombe City, and I was there three 
months. I then spent the remainder of the time in Gulfport getting 
contracts under his direction. I understand from this item of 1,300 
contracts taken by Crews & Cantwell that the inspector inferred that 
I was assisted by A. P. ]*owel] in taking these 1,300 contracts for 
Crews & Cantwell. That is an error. The fact is that Crews & 
Cantwell employed me in the latter part of February, 1912, while 
I was with them here in Washington City, just before the opening 
of the Mississippi Choctaw case before the subcommittee presided 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TBIBES. 383 

over by Mr. Russell, Powell left Washington previous to February 
16, 1912, which is the date of the circular letter sent out by Crews & 
Cantwell saying that they had severed their connection with him. 

JNIr. Carter. Do you know that Mr. Cantwell himself admitted 
here before the committee that he had not severed all connection 
with him, and that after that time he paid him a salary. 

Mr. CoNERLY. Let me explain it to you on that 

Mr. Carter (interposing). He said at first himself that he had 
severed all connection with Powell, but afterwards stated that they 
had paid him a salary to keep him quiet. What he wanted to keep 
him quiet about I do not know. 

Mr. Conerly. Let me tell you wdiat I know about that. I want 
to say what I knovv^ about that. While I was in Crews & Cantwell's 
office in the Munsey Building here, Mr. Masterson, of Texas, was 
there, and they employed me to go to Mississippi and take charge of 
their business. They had no connection at that time with A. P. 
Powell, because they had severed all connection with him in Feb- 
ruary or January, 1911. 

Mr. Carter. Here is what Mr. Cantwell said : 

Mr. Carter. How long was Powell in your employ? 
Mr. Cantwell. Until February, 1912. 

Mr. Conerly. After Crews & Cantwell employed me, in February, 
1912, the question arose as to what they would do with A. P. Powell. 

Mr. Carter. You mean in 1912 instead of 1911 ; I understood you 
to say 1911? 

Mr. Conerly. Now, you are getting that mixed up. 

Mr. Carter. Maybe I am. 

Mr. Conerly. I want to be exact in what I have to say. Crews & 
Cantwell severed their connection with A. P. Powell in February. 
1911. That is the fact. 

Mr. Carter. Then, how do you account for Mr. Cantwell's state- 
ment saying that Powell was in his employ until February, 1912 ? 

Mr. Conerly. That is w^hat I want to come to. I was in Wash- 
ington in February, 1912, as I explained awhile ago, and they era- 
ployed me to take charge of the business in Mississippi. The ques- 
tion then arose as to what would be done with Powell. They were 
afraid that Powell would make trouble. I suggested to him that it 
would be well, perhaps, to retain him under a salary and put him 
under my direction, so that, perhaps, I could keep him out of trouble. 

Mr. Harrison, What do you mean by keeping him out of trouble? 

Mr, Conerly, Keeping him from making trouble, 

Mr. Harrison. What do you mean by saying " keeping him from 
making trouble"? 

Mr. Conerly. We were afraid at that time that Powell might do 
something to militate against the interests of the Mississippi Choc- 
taws. 

Mr. Carter. What was there that he could do to militate against 
the Mississippi Choctaws? 

Mr. Conerly. Mr. Powell, while under the employ of William B, 
Matthews, or while taking contracts for William B. Matthews, 
charged a fee for taking those contracts — a fee of $2.50 — and Mr. 
Cantwell objected to anything of that kind being done by anyone 
under his employ. Now, it was feared that Powell would go back to 



884 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mississippi and open an office down there, and begin taking contracts 
and charging those people fees for the same, and we were opposing 
such a proceeding. I suggested to Mr. Cant well that if he could re- 
tain Powell at a small salary and send him down there under my 
charge, so that I might control him, perhaps it w^ould be best, and 
he employed Powell for that purpose. 

Mr. Carter. What do you know about Powell? Is he a straight 
felloW' or is he a crooked fellow ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I would not care to have any business transactions 
with him. 

Mr. Cari'er. You had the same opinion of him then that you have 
now? 

Mr; CoNERLY. I had at that time. 

Mr. Carter. And yet, having that opinion of him, you were willing 
to take him into this work under you so long as he was left subordi- 
nate to you? 

Mr. Conerly. The point w^as to keep him from doing as I said we 
were afraid he w^ould do, and that is opening an office and charging a 
fee for contracts. 

Mr. Carter. How would that operate against you? Plow would 
that affect you? If you were taking contracts for nothing, couldn't 
you get as many contracts as Powell could if he was asking them for 
money? How could that interfere with the plans of Cantwell & 
Crews or yourself? 

Mr. Coi>sERLY. There was policy in that. We did not want any- 
body to be coming in and charging fees for taking these contraf-ts. 

Mr. Carter. Well, you could not control everybod}', and anybody 
who wanted to could charge fees. If Mr. Powell didn't do it some- 
body else might do it. There certainly must have been some other 
cause. 

Mr. Conerly. There was nothing that I know of. 

Mr. Carter. I can not see the force of that argument. You say 
the only reason you kept Powell under your subordination, attempted 
to keep him subordinate to you. was to try to keep him from charging 
fees for the contracts he might take from the Mississippi Choctaws? 

Mr. CoKERLY. It was to keep him from doing indiscreet things. 
He had done things that created feeling in Mississippi, and wo 
wanted to avoid those kinds of troubles. Mr. Powell did not serve 
under me a single day, because he went back to Mississippi to 
straighten up some matters in Philadelphia, and he telegraphed 
Crews & Cantwell that the deal was off with him and that settled 
the question. He was not under me and did not assist me in taking 
a single contract in 1911, nor did anybody else. Every contract that 
was taken for Crews & Cantwell in 1912, up to February, 1913, and 
every contract taken for Thomas B. Crews was taken by myself. 

Mr. Carter. I see here an affidavit from you, taken by Special 
United States Indian Agent W. W. McConihe. in which this state- 
ment is made : 

I met Powell abonl July nnd jisked him wh;it ho wns doinji, and he said he 
was getting up claims for Mississii^pi Choctaws under the ti'eaty of 1030. I 
understood that he had been liefore Congress with the claims. He said that 
Crews & Cantwell were getting up the claims to present to Congress, the courts, 
or the department. Powell said he was getting the claims for that tirm. I do 
not know what he gets out of it. I have never heard Powell say that he was 
representing the Government, nor have I ever heard anyone say that tliey 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 385 

heard or was told by Powell that he was a United States official or was repre- 
senting the Government. At Bay St. Louis he was making no charges at first 
for his work. Powell required every applicant to show up his ancestry. 

At Bay St. Louis he ran out of blanks and had some more printed, and after- 
wards charged them $1.25, including notary fees. 

When was that ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. When he made those charges at Bay St. Louis? 

Mr. Carter. Yes. 

Mr. CoNERLY. In the latter part of 1910. 

Mr. Carter. That is, while taking contracts for Crews & Cantwell? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. His contract was severed in 1911, only a 
few months afterwards. 

Mr. Carter. That was while taking contracts for Crews & Cant- 
well. This affidavit further states: 

Powell f-ent me to Tylertown to work there getting up claims, and I made a 
charge of $2.50 for each application written up and paid him $1 for blanks. 

• Mr. CoNERLY. That was by Powell's direction. 

Mr. Carter. How do you reconcile your statement that you did 
not want these Mississippi Choctaws to be imposed upon by being 
charged a fee with the fact that you yourself, in collusion with 
Powell, had charged them fees? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I had no control of the matter. I could do no more 
than your clerk could do without your concurrence. 

Mr. Carter. You said you believed it was wrong, and that in order 
to prevent it you were willing to pay Powell a salary ? 

Mr. Conerly. I was simply a clerk working under his orders. 

Mr. Carter. You are a lawyer, are you not? 

Mr. CoxERLY. I would say, Mr. Chairman, that a clerk or stenog- 
rapher in the employ of any one is not responsible for the action 

Mr. Carter (interposing). Pie is responsible for his own action to 
his own conscience. 

Mr. CoNERLY. He is goA^erned by orders. 

Mr. Carter. Suppose they told you to kill a man ? 

Mr. CoKERLY. Let me refer you to one thing, and that is, that I 
served in the Confederate Army as a soldier, and I. learned to obey 
orders. If my officer gave me an order to do a thing it was my 
duty to perform it and to carry out that order, and as the employee 
of anyone in a legitimate business T would have no control. 

]Mr. Carter. I want to ask you this question : Is it your notion that 
if the man you are working for should direct you to do a thing that 
you thought was unconscionable and wrong it would be your duty 
to do it? Is that your notion of ethics? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I was a stranger to these proceedings. 

Mr. Carter. T would like to have an answer to that question. 1 
want to know what your position is. Can't we have a direct an- 
swer to that question, yes or no? 

Mr. CoxERLY. Ask it again, please. 

Mr. Carter. Is it your idea of ethics that if some one by whom 
you are employed calls upon you or directs you to do any questionable 
work it is your dutv to do it? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Of course not. 

Mr. Carter. Well, that answers the question. I heard what you 
stated with reference to your service as a Confederate soldier. My 

649G9— 15 25 



386 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

father was a captain in the Confederate Army, anvl I have a very 
hieh regard for the Confederate soldier, but it is doubtful if the 
ethics of army discipline, strict as they are, would require a man to 
do an illegal act simply because his superior officer orders him to 
do it. 

Mr. CoNERLY. Conditions were different then from what they were 
two years afterwards. I did not know anj'thing about that business. 
I W'as simply employed and was directed to go to Tylertown to take 
contracts and to charge a fee up there. That fee of $2.50 was fixed 
by Powell, and I was required to make that charge. 

Mr. Carter. At that time he was working for Crews & Cantwell? 

Mr. CoMERLY. No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. When was that? 

Mr. Con ERLY. That was at the time Powell was working for Cant- 
well & Crews 

Mr. Carter (interposing). You say he was taking contracts for 
Cantwell & Crews? 

Mr. CoNERLY. That was in November, 1910. That was in Novem- 
ber and a part of December, 1010. It w-as then that I Avas in Tyler- 
town under Powell's direction. 

Mr. Carter. You took contracts for Cantwell & Crews, didn't 
you? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir; in their name. I was working under 
Powell's direction. 

Mr. Car'itsr. And Powell was working for Cantwell & Crews? 

Mr. CoNERLY. He was taking contracts for their law office up at 
St. Louis. 

Mr. Carter. Do you know what he was being paid? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir ; I did not know anything about his business 
with Crews & Cantwell. 

Mr. Harrison. Mr. Conerly, on or about the 1st of July Mr. James 
McLaughlin, an inspector in the India) * Office here, was sent to 
investigate into this matter of contracts of Crews & Cantwell, Powell, 
and ethers with these Choctaw claimants. I notice in the report that 
was filed about that time by Mr. McLaughlin, which report I have 
not read at all, a statement on page 25. Now, Mr. McLaughlin is 
making this statement, and he says that you stated : 

Also that it was he [meaning you] who first interested Congressman Har- 
rison, of Mississippi, in Choctaw matters :ind got him to introduce the bill for 
reopening the Choctaw rolls; that he [meaning you] had interested United 
States Senators Williams and Vardaman, of Mississippi, in the Choctaw claim; 
also Congressman Morgan, of Louisiana, in whose district many Choctaws 
reside. 

Now, I want to ask you this: Did you make that statement to Mr. 
McLaughlin; and if so, on what facts did you base such a statement? 

Mr. Conerly. I met Maj. McLaughlin in the Great Southern 
Hotel by his request 

Mr. Carter (interposing). Why don't you answer Mr. Harrison's 
question ? 

Mr. Harrison. I think he will do that. 

Mr. Conerly. I remained with him about three hours, and we had 
a running conversation about these matters. I have no recollection 
whatever of making the statement as reported there. I may have 
stated, which was a fact, that I met' Mr. Harrison on one occasion 
in Gulfport, in May, 1011, and incidentally inquired of Mr. Harrison 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 387 

if he had seen Mr. A. P. Powell, and Mr. Harrison said, " No," and 
asked. me what Powell wanted to see him about, and I told him that 
Powell remarked to me that he Avoiild like to see Mr. Harrison to 
see if he could not interest him in introducing the bill. 

Mr. Harrison. You do not know whether you made this state- 
ment exactly in this way? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir; I did not make it that way. It is a mis- 
understanding on the part of the inspector. I might go further with 
that. "When I came to Washington City I did express the opinion 
that Mr. Harrison and ]Mr. Wickliffe, of Louisiana, would be the 
logical Congressmen to take up the fight for the Mississippi Choc- 
taws before Congress. I discussed that matter with Mr. Cantwell. 
I did not talk with Mr. Harrison on that question at all while I was 
in "Washington City. I do not think I ever mentioned the question 
to him. It is a misunderstanding, brought about by the general 
running conversation between the inspector and me. 

Mr. Harrison. Did the inspector take your statement down at 
the time? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir; it was a running conversation. If he took 
it down, I did not see him do it. 

Mr. Carter. You are interested in having the Mississippi Choc- 
taws enrolled, are j^ou not? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. You are an attorney? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I am not in the practice of the law, but I was an 
attorney by education and by profession. 

Mr. Carter. I mean that you represent the Mississippi Choctaws 
in some capacit3^ 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir; as an employee of Crews & Cantwell. 

Mr. Carter. You expect some remuneration for representing them, 
don't you? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I own individually a number of contracts that were 
transferred to me through an arrangement with Judge Crews. 

Mr. Carter. That is what I mean. You are representing them for 
a consideration, just as any other attorney might do? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Now, do you want this committee to understand that 
while you were representing the Mississippi Choctaws you ha^-e had 
no conversation with Mr. Harrison and that you have made no at- 
tempt in any way to have bills introduced and passed seeking their 
enrollment? 

Mr. CoNERLY. That I have never had any conversation 

Mr. Carter (interposing). That you have never had a conversa- 
tion with Mr. Harrison in reference to this matter, urging the intro- 
duction or passage of a bill, and that you have not in any Avay tried, 
through Congressmen and others, to promote the interests of the 
Mississippi Choctaws? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not recollect ever approaching Mr. Harrison. 

Mr. Carter. Then, you have taken money from the Mississippi 
Choctaws, you have taken some of their money and made contracts 
with them to represent them and take more, and yet you have not 
even suggested to their Congressmen that a bill ought to be intro- 
duced or that a measure should be passed for their relief, notwith- 
standing the fact that you collected $2.50 in fees for many contracts? 



388 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. CoNERLY. That matter was in the hands of our lawyers, and 
it was a matter that they had control of. I had no control af it. I 
have since become interested in these contracts, and I own this pres- 
ent 3^ear and I have received 

Mr. CxVRTER. What is your duty, under your contracts, to your 
clients? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I have received no compensation whatever from any 
Mississippi Choctaw whose contract I have taken 

Mr. Carter (interposing). Why? You have stated here in this 
affidavit that you received $2.50 from some of them. 

Mr. Conerly. Not since I have been in the employ of Crews & 
Cantwell. I received $2.50 for taking contracts while a clerk of 
A. P. Powell. 

Mr. Carter. I do not care at what time you did it. The point I 
make is that you did 

Mr. Conerly (interposing). I emphatically state that I have never 
received any fee from any Mississippi Choctaw or anybody else • 

Mr. Carter (interposing). But you stated in your affidavit that 
you charged $2.50 for contracts. 

Mr. Conerly. As clerk for A. P. Powell. 

Mr. Carter. Well, just let me ask you this: You say you did that 
as a clerk for A. P. Powell — do you know of what nationality A. P. 
Powell is? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not know anything about his pedigree. 

Mr. Carter. A man would not have to know anything about his 
pedigree. He could just take a look at him and tell. He is a negro. 

Mr. CoNERLr. I did not know it. 

Mr. Carter. Anybody who looks at him can tell that he is a negro. 
Now, then, I want to ask you this: While you were a clerk of A. P. 
Powell and were taking $2.50 from these Mississippi Choctaws, what 
was your duty ? 

Mr. Conerly. It was my duty to take contracts in the name of 
William B. Matthews. 

Mr. Carter. What afterwards happened to those contracts taken 
for William B. Matthews ? What became of them ? 

Mr. CoNERLr. The contracts I wrote up in the name of Matthews 
were turned over to Powell. 

Mr. Carter. Wliat eventually became of them? 

Mr. Conerly. They were turned over by Powell to Mr. Matthews. 

Mr. Carter. What did Mr. Matthews do with them? 

Mr. Conerly, He transferred those contracts to Crews & Cantwell. 

Mr. Carter. Did you have anything to do with the transfer of 
those contracts? 

Mr. Co>;erly. I assisted him in it. 

Mr. Carter. You persuaded Mr. Matthews to do it? 

Mr. Conerly. I talked to Mr, Matthews on the question and talked 
with Mr. Cantwell on the question, and they got up between them 
negotiations for the transfer of those contracts, and they were trans- 
ferred by Mr. Matthews to Crews & Cantwell. 

Mr. Carter. What did you get for your services in securing the 
transfer of these contracts ? 

Mr. Conerly. Nothing. 

Mr, Carter. You took no interest in the contracts ? 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 389 

Mr. CoNERLY. I was assisting Mr. Cantwell in his office. I was 
here at his office with Mr. Cantwell, assisting him in his office and 
doing office work. 

Mr. Carter. You are working, then, under the employ of Cant- 
well & Crews? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. And were no longer under the employ of Powell? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I did not get anything for the part I took in trans- 
ferring those contracts. 

Mr. Carter. Except your regular salary? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I did not have any regular salary. 

Mr. Carter. Didn't you get anything at all while working for 
Crews & Cantwell ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. They paid my expenses, but they gave me no salary. 
I have not received one dollar in salary from Crews & Cantwell nor 
from Judge Crews since I have been engaged in this business. 

Mr. Carter. You just worked for your expenses and boarded your- 
self ? Is that what you would have us to understand ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. In 1912, when they employed me to take contracts 
for them in Mississippi, they allowed me a small amount to remain 
at home and to take contracts by correspondence and from those who 
would come to see me. 

Mr. Carter. Was not that a salary? 

Mr. CoNERLY. They did not allow me any travel money. 

Mr. Carter. But was not that a salary? 

Mr. CoNERLY. You might call it a salary. 

Mr. Carter. Then, you did receive a salary ? 

Mr. Conerly. Since that time there has been no agreement about 
any salary. 

Mr. Carter. Since that time you have been working for your ex- 
penses ? 

Mr. Conerly. I have been doing most of the work and Judge Crews 
has been furnishing money to pay expenses. 

Mr. Carter. Since then you have been working just for your ex- 
penses? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. What did you get when you worked for Powell? 

Mr. Cois'ERLY. On the $2.50 charge Powell required $1 for himself 
and he allowed me $1.50 to pay notary fees and for my own expenses 
8nd to pay clerk hire, such as that. My services and my expenses 
had to come out of the $1.50 that was charged. 

Mr. Carter. Now, Mr. Conerly, your statement to the committee 
is that with a slight exception you have never received any salary 
as compensation for your work, but that you have worked for ex- 
penses alone and that you do not expect anything, any remuneration 
from those contracts, except those which you have taken in your 
own name. 

Mr. Conerly. There is no agreement for anything. 

Mr. Car'tor. Do you expect to get anything out of the conti-acts 
which Cantwell & Crews have? 

Mr. Conerly. I have no right to expect anything. 

Mr. Carter. You want the cH>mnnttee to understand tliat you have 
simply put in your time on these matters, working to get up these 



390 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

contracts and placed tlieni in the hands of Cantwell & Crews expect- 
ing nothing on earth but your expenses to be paid? 

Mr. CaNERLY. I think you carry it a little too far, 

Mr. Carter. Then how are we to understand you? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I had other means of support besides taking the 
contracts and I was not dependent on them furnishing money to pay 
my expenses. The only salary I received was $50 a month, which 
was allowed me for living. 

Mr. Carter. How long did you receive that? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I received $50 a month from about February 20, 
1912, up to August, 1912. There was March, April, May, June, July, 
and August. 

Mr. Carter. Six months; that is $300? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. You say that I am carrying you too far. You went 
into an agreement with Mr. Cantwell and Mr. Crews and this fellow 
Powell by which you were to take contracts, put in your time, and 
work for them without any hope of any consideration or reward 
except $300, and for that amount you were willing to place in their 
hands contracts which looked to giving them millions of dollars in 
fees? 

Mr. CoNERLY. That was not the stipulated amount. The stipulated 
agreement — that was a verbal agreement — between Mr. Masterson, 
Mr. Cantwell, and myself was that they would allow me living ex- 
penses — you might call it a salary — simply a stipend to remain at 
home and take contracts until we could get the bill through without 
furnishing me with any means whatever to pay expenses to go to see 
these people. 

Mr. Carter. You said " until we could get the bill through." 
When the bill went through you were to get something else? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. And you never expect anything? 

Mr. CoNERiA'. No; there is no written contract to expect anything 
from them. The case is in the hands of our lawyers. 

Mr. Carter. Why can you not say what you expect? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not expect anything out of these contracts ex- 
cept that I am a claimant myself. 

Mr. Carter. You are a claimant? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes; I am a claimant myself. 

Mr. Carter. And that is all you expect ? 

Mr. Conerly. All I expect to ever realize except my own expenses, 
which these lawyers agreed to give me. 

Mr. Hurley. Hoav many contracts do you hold at this time? 

Mr. Conerly. In my own name? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Conerly. The only contracts that I have any claim on are 
contracts that were transiterred by ^Ir. Crews to me in this way: In 
Februarjr, 1913, the firm of Crows & Cantwell failed to pay me any 
money for my services ; in other words, failed to send me any money 
to pay my expenses. In February I took about 110 contracts in the 
name' of Crews & Cantwell for tliem at my own individual expense. 
While I was taking contracts for Crews & Cantwell in 1912, Mr. 
Cantwell wrote to me and told me that I might take a number of 
contracts in the name of Crews & Cantwell and that I might have 



EISTEOLLMEZSTT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 391 

the benefit of the contingent fee under those contracts as compensa- 
tion in lieu of salary that had not been paid to me, 

Mr. Hurley. Hoav many of those contracts did you take? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I took 110 at my own expense, I think 119 in the 
name of Crews & Cantwell. 50 of which I was to have the benefit of, 
and then there were 140 contracts taken with Senator Bond, of Mis- 
sissippi. 

Mr. Hurley. What are his initials ? 

Mr. Co^'ERLY. I do not remember his initials. 

Mr. Carter. Is he a United States Senator ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir; a State senator — Senator Bond. I do not 
remember his initials. Mr. Bond took 140 contracts. 

Now, you have 140 contracts and 119 and 110 contracts, approxi- 
mately, maybe a few more or less, but that was the number. Judge 
Crews failed to furnish me any money to pay my expenses after Jan- 
uary, 1914. Since that time I have taken about 600 contracts for 
Judge Crews and paid all the expenses myself. 

Mr. Hurley. I beg your pardon for interrupting you just now, but 
what I asked you was how many contracts you now hold as your 
own or how many are you interested in with others, just state the 
number ? 

Mr, Conerly. I will tell you in a minute. That I have a personal 
interest in ? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Conerly. I can not give you the exact number. 

Mr. Hurley. Approximately ? 

Mr, Conerly, One hundred and ten and 119 — my recollection is 
229 and 140, 364, 

Mr. Hurley. You have a personal interest in 364 Mississippi Choc- 
taw contracts? 

Mr, Conerly. I own those absolutely now according to an agree- 
ment with Judge Crews. 

Mr. Hurley. You said to Mr. Carter a little while ago that you 
did not expect any return from the enrollment of these persons, ex- 
cept that which you might get from the fact that you are a claimant 
for citizenship ? 

Mr. Conerly. That was a matter that occurred years before. This 
is a recent matter. At that time I had no interest. 

Mr. Carter. I asked you the question, what interest you had in the 
matter, and you replied that you had not any interest except the 
interest of your own enrollment aa an Indian. 

Mr. CoNERLr. You did not understand me. After January, 1914, 
Judge Crews failed to send me any more money to pay my expenses. 
I had taken 110 contracts for Crews & Cantwell at my own expense, 
and they .never paid me. 

Mr. Carter. Are those the contracts you charged $2.50 for? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. 

Mr, Carter. You were taking them at your own expense without 
any remuneration ? 

Mr. Conerly. Except as to the notary fee where they appeared be- 
fore me. 

Mr. Carter. How much ? 

Mr. Conerly. Fifty cents. 

Mr. Carter. How many? 



392 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. CoNERLT. One hundred and ten. 

Mr. Carter. You took 110 contracts for Crews & Cantwell, paid 
your own expense, wrote up the contracts, and delivered them to 
Crews & Cantwell without receiving any compensation whatever or 
the hope of any compensation? 

Mr. CoNERLT. No, sir; I did not deliver them. Just let me try to 
explain that. 

Mr. Carter. I am trying to get you to explain. 

Mr. CoNERLY. I have stated that in February, 1912, the firm of 
Crews & Cantwell failed to furnish me with any money to pay my 
expenses, and I took the contracts in their name without any com- 
pensation at all, at my expense, but I stayed at home. 

Mr. Carter. It does not matter whether you stayed at home or 
not. It took effort, it took paper, it took pens, it took ink, it took 
postage stamps for the correspondence; you could not have done 
the work without expense and without individual effort. Now, the 
thing I want to understand is this : Why is it that you are willing to 
devote your time, your work, your energy, and your money to pro- 
cure contracts for Cantwell & Crews without any hope of recompense 
or reward? 

Mr. Conerly. I did not. That is not settling this point at all. I 
want to make a statement which is a fact and the chairman will not 
allow me to do it. 

Mr. Hurley. I understood you to say that in part of those con- 
tracts you had no fee except the notary fee where they appeared 
before you ? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hurley. Is it permissible under the laws of Mississippi for 
a notary to take the acknowledgment on an instrument running to 
himself or from which he expects to derive profit? 

Mr. Conerly. They were not taken in my name. I had no interest 
when I took the contracts. They were transferred to me subse- 
quently on account of a failure of Judge Crews to pay me for my 
services in 1914; they were transferred in consideration of that. 
That is a recent transaction. I had no interest in those contracts any 
more than you had at the time they were taken. 

Mr. Hurley. Is this Senator Bond that you speak of the same gen- 
tleman who was prosecuted in Mississippi for some alleged mis- 
conduct in regard to the records of the State senate ? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir; the same man. 

Mr. Hurley. AVere you in the service of Crews & Cantwell in 
1913? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes; up to the 1st of March, 1913. 

Mr. Hurley. Did you know of the organization of the Texas- 
Oklahoma Investment Co., which noAv holds the Crews & Cantwell 
contracts? 

Mr. Conerly. I knew nothing about it and heard nothing about it 
until I read the discussion in the House of Eepresentatives since I 
have been in Washington this month. I did not know a thing 
about it. 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Conerly, on the 22d day of October, 1913, I 
delivered an address before the Lake Mohonk Conference of Friends 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 393 

of the Indian and other Dependent Peoples at Lake Mohonk, N. Y., 
in which I made this statement : 

The great delay on the part of the United States Government m beginning 
the sale of the residue of the tribal estate and the distribution of the funds 
arising therefrom after the allotment of tiie Indians and after the closing of 
the rolls caused all the unsuccet-sful ai)[)licants for enrollement to believe that 
{IS long as there was a grest residue of tribal property remaining there was 
still hope for them to secure citizenship in the tribes. These applicants em- 
jiloyed attorneys to resubmit their claims for citizenship, and at the present 
time, according to the statements made by the attorneys for claimants who have 
appeared before the Committees on Indian Affairs of Congress, there are prob- 
ably not less than 50,000 persons throughout the United States who have em- 
ployed attorneys to present their claims for rights of citizenship in the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw A'ations. The contracts which attorneys have taken from the 
claimants for citizenship provide that if the attorney is successful in securing 
enrollment for the claimant he shall receive a free ranging generally from 25 
to 50 per cent of the amount the claimant would obtain by reason of citizenship, 

I said further : 

I am advised and believe that some of the attorneys have capitalized these 
citizenship contracts; that is to say, they have pledged their contracts for 
money with which to maintain representation before the committees of Con- 
gress to continuously urge the reopening of the rolls, the persons who furnish 
the money of course to share in the fees in case the claimants are successful. 

Did you know that I made that address at the Lake Hohonk Con- 
ference ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I learned about that from an article taken from the 
St. Lous Globe-Democrat, which is included in the resolution which 
was passed by the Society of Mississippi Choctaws. 

Mr. Hurley. Where was the Society of Mississippi Choctaws as- 
sembled at that time? 

Mr. CoNERLY. At Gulfport. 

Mr, Hurley. Who were present at that assembly ? 

Mr. Conerly. The Society of Mississippi Choctaws was organ- 
ized 

Mr. Hurley (interposing). I did not ask anything about the 
organization, but who was present when the resolutions to which you 
refer were passed? 

Mr. Conerly. The chief council of the Mississippi Choctaws pre- 
sided over by Berry Wilson, the president. 

Mr. Hurley. Who was present at the council to which you refer? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not remember. 

Mr. Hurley. Who were the members of the chief council ? 

Mr. Coneuly. I do not remember. 

Mr. Hurley. Give us the names of some of the persons present, 
some of the names of the chief council of the INIississippi Choctaws. 

Mr. Coneuly. Berry Wilson is the president. I can not remem- 
ber those names. It is impossible for me to remember all those 
names. 

Mr. Hurley. You presented a resolution, which was passed, and 
you do not know who passed it or who was present? 

Mr. Conerly. It was passed by the chief council of the Missis- 
sippi Choctaws. 

Mr. HuRLKY. You do not know anybody else who was present ex- 
cept yourself and the president? 

Mr. (.'oNERLY. When a meeting of council is held there are more 
or less people there. 



394 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. Hurley. How many people were present? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I can not tell you ; I do not know. 

Mr. Hurley. Was there anybody present except yourself and 
Mr. Wilson? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. 

]\Ir. Hurley. Who^ 

Mr. CoNERLY. There was Benjamin Franklin Bulloch, who lives in 
Gulfport. Berry Wilson is the president of the chief council of the 
Mississippi Choctaws. We have several hundred members. I can 
not remember the names of those present. The meeting was called 
and that ai'ticle published in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat was 
read; I read it. 

Mr. Carter. How did you come to see it ? Did anybody call atten- 
tion to it? 

Mr. CoNERLY. The article was sent to me; the clipping was sent 
to me, taken from the St. Louis Globe-Democrat. 

Mr. Carter. Who sent it to you ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Judge Crews sent it to me. 

Mr. Carter. Was there anybody at this meeting except the mem- 
bers of your association? 

Mr. Conerly. None that I know of. 

Mr. Carter. Ts this association a secret society? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir; it is a historical, social, and literary so- 
ciety. I founded it myself in 1912. 

Mr. Carter. Do you know whether there was anyone else present 
except the members of the society? 

Mr. Coxerly. If so, I did not know it. 

Mr. Hurley. Are the proceedings of that organization conducted 
in English or Choctaw? 

Mr. Conerly. In P^nglish. 

Mr. Hurley. You can not state to the committee approximately 
hov many people were present at that meeting or where the meet- 
ing was iieldf 

Mr. (\)XFRLY. The meeting was held — we do not have a particular 
pla-je of meeting, we have been too poor to hire a place for the .'■leet- 
ing, and we have the meetings at the residence of our secretary, Mr. 
I'earl Wiktu.. 

Mr. llri.'i.r.y. Can you state approximately how .many persons 
were present? 

Mr. Conerly. I suppose there were 12 or 15 present when the 
resolution was read. 

Mr. Hurley. They were claimants for citizenship as Mississippi 
Choctaws. 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. The resolutions were inspired by that 
article published in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat. 

Mr. Hurley. What degree of Choctaw blood do you claim to have? 

Mr. Conerly. It is hard for me to tell that. I am the great- 
great-grandson of Turner Ward. His daughter was Letitia Ward, 
who was my great-grandmother, and my grandmother was a Choc- 
taw woman. I learned through correspondence that has been sub- 
mitted to me from the Interior Department that her mother Avas a 
Choctaw woman and her father was connected with the Choctaw 
Nation. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 395 

Mr. Hurley. You do not know just what degree, if any, of 
Choctaw blood you have? 

Mr. CoNERLY. The best information I have on the subject is that 
my father was one-fourth, or about one-fourth, Choctaw. - It is 
hard to tell that. It is hard to tell that because I do not know 
what degree of blood his mother had. 

Mr. Hurley. Did you have any intimation of the fact that you 
were supposed to have Indian blood before this man Powell, whose 
name has been before the committee this morning, suggested it to 



you 



Mr. Conerly. It has been a family tradition all my life. I was 
born in 18H in Marion County 

Mr. Carter (interposing). Did you say it was a tradition? 

Mr. Conerly. It was family knowledge handed down to us, and 
we have a Bible record. 

Mr. Carter. Does your Bible record show that you are part 
Indian ? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; there is no Bible record that shows that. 

Mr. Carter. How would your Bible record be able to connect you 
with the rolls? 

Mr. Conerly. My grandfather knew who he was. 

Mr. Carter. Do you say that the Bible record shows that he was 
an Indian? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; but his children said he was. 

Mr. Carter. In the Bible record? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; the Bible record does not show anything 
like that. 

Mr. Carter. What has the Bible record to do with it, then ? 

Mr. Conerly. The Bible record shows descent. I want to ex- 
plain to you that according to the correspondence submitted to me 
and that came from the Interior Department my grandmother was 
a Choctaw woman, the w^ife of Owen Conerly, who was my grand- 
father. I do not suppose that any man could get up and testify 
that he was the descendant of any particular person or race of 
people. No man can swear to that. 

Mr. Hurley. Is Col. Ward, who you say was an ancestor of 
yours, the same Col. Ward 

Mr. Conerly (interposing). It was not "Colonel" Ward, but 
'•Turner" Ward. 

Mr. Hurley. Referring to this meeting of the Mississippi Choc- 
taws, where you claim to have presented this resolution, as a mat- 
ter of fact that was held in a livery barn in Gulfport, Miss., was it 
not? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. 

Mr. Hurley. Did not Crews & Cantwell prepare this resolution? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; they knew nothing about it until after it 
was prepared. I am responsible for every word of it myself. It is 
based upon that article published in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat. 

Mr. Hurley. You used this language in the resolution, referring 
to that part of my address before the Lake Mohonk Conference, 
which I have read to-day into the record: 

Resolved, by the chief council of the Society of Mississifipi Choctaws, sitting 
in council in GulfF'ort. Miss., November 7, 1913, for nnd in behalf of the Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws, that we denounce snid charges as false, without foundation 
In fact, and an unfair means of trying to defeat the efforts of the Missis- 



896 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

sippi Choctfiws in obtaininj; (heir birthric'Jits by legitinir.te procetlnre and 
legislation throngh the supreme authority in all matters in which the Indians 
are concerned. 

Did yon loiow at the time yon put that in the resohition that 
what I said about the hypothecation and the syndication of the 
Mississippi Choctaw contracts was, in fact, true and was not false? 

Mr. Cois'EKLY, The resohition was based upon the article pub- 
lished in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat, which was incorporated 
with the resolution. 

Mr. Hurley. I asked you if you knew of the ors^anization of tho 
Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co., which held the Mississippi Choc- 
taw contracts at that time, and that it was furnishing money to 
maintain a lobby to force open the rolls of the Choctaws? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir; I did not know anythinoj about the organ- 
ization of the company at all. The only information I had in re- 
gard to that was the information that Mr. Masterson was in it, but 
I did not even know Mr. Masterson or 

Mr. liuRLEY (interposing). You know now that what I said was 
true ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir; I did not laiow it was true. 

Mr. Hurley. Don't you know about the Texas-Oklahoma Invest- 
ment Co.? 

Mr. Conerly. Only from 

Mr. Hurley (interposing). Do you mean to tell this committee 
that you do not know that the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co., 
with a capital stock of $100,000, now holds the Crews & Cantwell 
contracts? 

Mr. Conerly. I do say that I did not know anything about that 
company or the organization of that syndicate until I came to Wash- 
ington and read it in that record. 

Mr. Hurley. Do you know now of the existence of that company? 

Mr. Conerly. I only know it from information of speeches in the 
record. 

Mr. Hurley. If the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co. does exist 
and does hold these contracts and is furnishing the money to main- 
tain this representation before Congress, is this statement of yours in 
this resolution true ? 

Mr. Conerly. I can not answer that question, because I do not 
understand you. 

Mr. Carter. Let me ask you a question : Have you read these sub- 
committee hearings here at all? Have you read this document [indi- 
cating] ? Did you read Mr. Cant well's statement before the sub- 
committee ? 

Mr. Conerly. Do you mean recently? 

Mr. Carter. This one here that I have handed to you ? 

Mr. Conerly. Let me see it here. I have never read it in printed 
form. 

^Ir. Carter. You said you only learned that from the record of 
speeches made? 

Mr. Conerly. I read some of this before it was printed in this 
pamphlet form. 

Mr. Carter. Then, if you have read it before it was printed, or at 
any other time, you do know of the existence of the Texas-Oklahoma 
Investment Co. from the statement of Mr. Cantwell himself and not 
from the speeches in the record. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 397 

Mr. CoNERLY. From information derived from speeches. 

Mr. Carter. Are you trying to place responsibility for your in- 
formation of the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co. upon some Con- 
gressman's speech when you knew, or ought to have known, that that 
speech was based upon statements made by Mr. Cantwell himself 
before this committee? 

Mr. CoNERLY. These resolutions were based upon that publication 
in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat. 

Mr. Carter. I did not ask you about that. What do you know 
about the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co. ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not know anything about that organization of 
my own knowledge. 

Mr. Carter. You say that you knew something about it from 
speeches published in the record, but what you really know is based 
upon the statement of Mr. Cantwell himself, is it not ? 

Mr. Conerly. I have learned that since I came on to Washington 
last month. 

Mr. Hurley. I want to see if I can get this matter straightened 
out in the record. You do know that Mr. Cantwell admits the 
existence of this Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co., which now holds 
his contracts? You heard him admit that in the record? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I see that in the record. I read it in the record. 

Mr. Hurley. You know now that he admits it? 

Mr. CoNERLY. From that information; yes, sir. 

Mr. Hurley. Then, if you did not know it at the time you charged 
me with having made false statements to the conference at Lake 
Mohonk, N. Y., you know now that the statements you made at that 
time concerning my statements is untrue, do you not? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I have never read your speech. 

Mr. Hurley. If I did say all that you say in your resolution that 
I said, is not everything that you charged me with having stated in 
your resolution true? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Will the chairman permit me to read this article 
from the St. Louis Globe-Democrat? 

Mr. Hurley. I suggest that the entire resolution go into the 
record. 

Mr. Carter. Without objection, it is so ordered. 

(The resolution referred to is as follows:) 

Resolutions Pkeskntkd by Luke W. Conerly and Adopted by the Chief 
Council Miasissippi Choctaws, Novembeb 7, 1913. 

Whereas at a convention held at Mohawk, N. Y., as related in a dispatch to 
the St. Louis Globe-Donioci-at October 23, the attorney for the Choctaw Nation, 
Mr. P. J. Hurley, is reported to have charged that a "plot or consi)iracy '' was 
formed and at work to "cheat and defraud the Choctaws and Chickasaws out 
of their lands .and moneys derived from the sale of their lands." characterizing 
these persons as land grabbers backing legislation for said purpose, as follows, 
to wit : 

" FRAUDS ON INDIANS TOLD AT CONCLAVE — CHOCTAW ATTORNEY EXPOSES PLOT TO 
CHEAT TRIBES OF MILLIONS — OPPOSES NEW ROLLS — LAND GRABBERS SAID TO BACK 
LEGISLATION TO PREVENT BIG DISTRIBUTION. 

"MoHONK Lake, N. Y., October 22. 
"Divergent views of the capabilities of the American Indian started a debate 
today that in one form or another will reach Congress. It marked the opening 
of the annual conference of friends of the Indians and other dependent peoples. 



398 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

"Some of the delegates believed that the Indian still was a child and that the 
Federal GovernTnent had .grossly neglected him. Others, apparently a minority 
declared that some of the Indian tribes should be released altogether from Gov- 
ernment supervision, left to take the responsibility of their welfare and pay the 
price if they failed. There was expressed also an urgent demand for taking 
Indian affairs out of politics and putting them in the care of a nonpartisan com- 
mission. 

"The Five so-called Civilized Tribes of Oklahoma were the Indians mainly 
discussed today. Daniel Kelsey, superintendent of the Union Indian agency at 
Muskogee, described how these Indians were defrauded of their valuable lands. 
He urged that physicians be stationed in the Indian settlements to check the 
spread of contagious diseases. 

"P. J. Hurley, national attorney for the Choctaw Nation, one of the Five 
Tribes, denounced the land interests that were defeating the efforts to have 
Congress distribute $10,000,000 belonging to the Choctaws and Chickasaws and 
derived from the sale of their lands. The failure to distribute these moneys, he 
asserted, was due to attorneys hired by persons who hoped to benefit bv proving 
citizenship in the Choct:iw and Chickasaw Nations if the Government should 
reopen the tribal rol'.s. Such citizenship was worth from $5,000 to $8,000, he 
said, and if the rolls were reopenel some attorneys would make thousnnds of 
dollars because they have taken claimants' cases on contingent fees of from 
25 to 50 per cent." 

And whereas such charges are a thrust at the attorneys of the Mississippi 
Choctaws. Messrs. Thomas B. Crews and Harry J. Cantwell. of St. Louis, Mo., 
and the friends and supporters of the ]\Iississippi Choctaws in the Congress of 
the United States, a libel upon their honor and integrity, and a slnnder upon 
the leaders of the Mississippi Choctaws, claiming their rights, in a bill before 
Congress, presented by the Hon. Pat. Harrison, of Mississippi, in the Sixty- 
second Congress, in January, 1912, and referred to the Committee on Indian 
Affairs, a full hearing of which was had, beginning in February, 1912. before a 
subconnnittee of the Committee on Indian Affairs, House of Representatives of 
the Sixty-second Congress, composed of Mr. Russell as chairman, and Messrs. 
Miller and Smith; that lengthy arguments were heard before that committee; 
that the tribal attorneys and representatives were fully heard; that a report 
was made by the Interior Department to that subconnnittee; that after careful 
deliber.'ition during a period of nine months the report of the subcommittee was 
unnnimously made i-econunending the enrollment of those who claimed and 
could prove their rights under the treity of 1930; and that accompanying this 
bill was a lengthy statement printed by order of the Committee on Indian Af- 
fairs, made by Cbirence B. Miller, of Minnesota, a member of the subcommittee, 
indorsing the claims of the Mississippi Choctaws and others who have been de- 
nied enrollment; that the tribal authorities, their representatives and attorneys, 
and friends in Congress, having twice sought by amendment to the regular In- 
diiin appropriation bill the distribution of several millions of the funds on hand, 
and believing the Mississippi Choctaws are entitled to Iheir proportion of that 
fund, they have properly and legitimately opposed its distribution until tlieir 
rights could be determined, and in making this opposition have pointed to the 
action of the Committee on Indian Affairs of the House, which has heretofore 
favorably recommended tlieir enrollment; that the effort to secure this distribu- 
tion h;Ts twice been defeated openly on the floor of the United States Senate, 
once in February, 1913, and agnin in June, 1913; that among those wlio opposed 
this distribution because of its injustice were such men as Senator Lodge, of 
Massachusetts; Senator McCumber, of North Dakota; Senator La Follette. of 
Wisconsin; Senators Willi.ims and Vardaman, of Mississippi, and many other 
distinguished members of both the Senate and the House; that this bill was 
fairly defeated after an open discussion and vote in spite of the opposition of 
the tribal authorities and their liigh-salaried attorneys and repi-esentatives. 
Therefore, 

Resolved, By the Chief Council of the Society of Mississippi Choctaws, sitting 
in council in Gulfport, Miss., November 7, 113, for and in behalf of the Missis- 
sippi Choctaws, that we denounce said charges as false, without foundation in 
fact, and an unfiir means of trying to defeat the efforts of the Mississippi Choc- 
taws in obtaining their birthrights by legitimate procedure and legislation 
through the supreme authority in all matters in which the Indians are con- 
cerned. 



E2s'R0LLMENI IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 399 

Resolved,. That we have never forfeited, nor ever intend to forfeit, any rights 
retained by the fourteenth article of the treaty of Dancing Itabbit Creeli of 
September 27, 1S30, which expressly says : " Persons who claim under this article 
shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw citizen," and t^ey do not cease to be 
citizens of the Choctaw ISatiou, entitled to the rights and privileges of all other 
citizens of the nation. 

Resolved, That the Choctaw Nation, claiming protective authority over the 
Mississippi Choctaws and obtained judgment against the United States, through 
the Supreme Court, in the eighties for damages done the Mississippi Choctaws 
for a violation of the treaty of 1830, if we were children of the Choctaw Nation 
then we are as much so now, not only entitled to this damage money, but to an 
equal share in the lands and moneys of the Choctaw Nation, all of which has 
been denied us. 

Resolved, That being deprived of our rights, under acts of Congress of 1896 
creating the Dawes Commission, by unlawful and cruel procedures of a Court of 
Claims established by the lawyers of the Chot-taw Nation in violation of all 
laws of equity, and acts passed by Congress and signed by the President of the 
United States in 1902, quieting our claims forever, denying us the right of peti- 
tion and hearing or investigation, there was no other hope for relief except by 
the employment of eminent counsel — deprived of every vestige of rights — poor 
and without means we were compelled through a contingent fee contract plan 
to seek redress, by this means and this only. 

Resolved, That the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States giving 
judgment against the United States for damages done the Mississippi Choctaws 
in depriving them of the lands promised them by virtue of the treaty, said 
damage money being paid to the Choctaw Nation west, and not to the Missis- 
sippi Choctaws who were entitled to it, fixed beyond a question of doubt the 
status of the Mississippi Choctaws as members of the nation, entitling them to 
the right to share equally in the distribution of the nation's property. 

Resolved, That we call upon our people everywhere to stand firm in the 
declaration of their rights under a solemn treaty whose obligations have never 
been fulfilled with them. Driven from their homes to seek shelter with their 
helpless families in the forests, shut out from all rights, deprived of appropria- 
tions for schools and education, in humility and despair with their own mother 
nation against them, we come before the legislative branch of that Government 
for which our ancestors shed their blood, to correct the wrongs done them and 
us in the past; and we hurl back to its source every insinuation made against 
us or our lawyers and Congressmen of a plot and conspiracy to cheat and de- 
fraud the Choctaw Nation, and we extend to that supreme authority to whom 
we appeal, the Congress of the United States, our perfect and sincere confidence 
in their honesty and integrity and their unbiased sense of justice. 

We emphatically and boldly denounce as false and wicked all charges by 
whomsoever made of a plot or conspiracy to cheat and defraud the Choctaw Na- 
tion of one foot of land or one cent of money. We ask only that which of right 
belongs to use as members of the family to shai'e equally in the allotments of its 
wealth, wherever we may be located, by lawful means only. 

We appeal to the President of the United States to give his ear to our cause 
in Congress, willing to rest it upon the foundation of a solemn treaty between 
two friendly nations; the supreme authority resting in the Congress and the 
judicial decree of the highest tribunal in the land. 

With these declarations we submit to the judgment of civilization if such can 
be construed into a " plot to cheat and defraud." 

Resolved, That our i^^ecretary be instructed to forwax'd copies of these resolu- 
tions to Ills Excellency, the President of the United States; to the Secretary of 
the Interior, to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, to the Committees on Indian 
Affairs of the House of Representatives and the Senate; to our Slate Senators, 
Hons. John Sharpe Williams and James K. Vardaman; to Hon. Pat. Harrison, 
authors of the bill (II. R. 19213) for relief of the Mississippi Choctaws, pre- 
sented in the Sixty-second Congress, and others Members of Congress from Mis- 
sissippi and other States, and we request newspapers friendly to our case to 
publish the same. 

Uerry Wilson, President. 
Pkakl L. Wilson, Secretary. 



400 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

(Mr. Hurley submitted for the record a copy of his address before 
the Lake Mohonk Conference, as follows:) 

Address of P. J. Hurley, National Attorney foe the Choctaw Nation, 
Before the Lake Mohonk Conference of Friends of the Indian and Otheb 
Dependent Peoples, Mohonk Lake, N. Y., Wednesday, October 22, 1913. 

In this discussion I shall consider only matters pertaining to the tribal estate 
of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. I shall not attempt here to discuss 
any matters pertaining to the individual estates of allottees. Any reference 
made to matters pertaining to the individual estates of the Indians will be 
merely incidental to the discussion of mutters pertaining to the tribal estate. 

The question of the final settlement of tlie tribal estates of the Five Civilized 
Tribes is one of great importance to both the Indian citizens and the white 
citizens of Oklahoma. 

Approximately 101,000 persons haA'e received allotments of land as citizens 
of the Five Civilized Tribes and approximately one-third of this number are 
now restricted ; that is to say, their allotments are inalienable, and these re- 
stricted Indians are under the supervision of the Department of the Interior. 

The tribal estates of the Cherokee. Creek, and Seminole Nations have been 
almost entirely disposed of, and the final settlement of the estates of these 
three nations is not far distant. The same is not true of the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations. All projierty belonging to these two nntions is owned in 
common by both nations. Each citizen of the Choctaw and Chickasiiw Nations 
has received an allotment of 320 acres of the average land and each enrolled 
freedman of said nation has received an allotment of 40 acres of l:ind. After 
each citizen and freedman had been given an allotment there was a residue 
of tribal property remaining. This residue consists of what is known as the 
segregated coal and asphalt land, the timber reserve, and the unnllotted land. 
The title to this property is still held by the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, 
and the property so held at the lowest estimation is valued at $35,000,000. 
More than $10,000,000 worth of the unallotted land belonging to the two tribes 
has been sold by the United States Government and the money received therefor 
is now held in trust by the Government for the Indians. A great amount of 
this money is deposited in banks in Oklahoma. No part of it has been dis- 
tributed per capita among the Indians. 

On July 1, 1902, Congress enacted a law which was known as the supple- 
mental agreement between the Choctaw find Chickasiiw Nations and the 
United States. This agreement was ratified by the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
people September 25, 1902. The agreement provided that when the rolls 
of citizenship had been completed and each Indian and freedman liad re- 
ceived their allotment of land, that the residue of the tribal estiite remaining 
should be sold and the funds arising from the snle should be distributed per 
capita among the Indians. There wns a specific clause in this agreement pro- 
viding tliat the segregated coal and aspliiilt land should be sold within two 
years from the date of tlie agreement. The United States has not complied 
with tlie terms of this agreement and has not sold tlie tribal estate and dis- 
tributed the proceeds among the Indians as agreed. Mnny years have elapsed 
since the Indians were given their allotment and since the rolls of citizenship 
were completed by the Government, yet the terms of the treaty providing for 
the sale of the residue of the tribnl estate and the distribution of the funds 
arising from the sale among the Indians have not been complied with by the 
United States Government. The Indians individually, in tribal meetings and 
through their tribal governments, have year after year petitioned the United 
States Government to comply with the terms of the agreement, but all without 
avail. 

The unrestricted Indians in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations are as a 
class very intelligent and thrifty people and there are many in the restricted 
class who are competent. The Indians have been dissntisfied on account of the 
dilatory manner in which the Government has handled the settlement of their 
estate. This dissatisfaction among the Indians, caused by the delay of the 
United States Government in performing its obligations under the terms of 
the treaty, is Inrgely the cause for the execution of the so-called " McMurray 
Individual contracts." These contracts were executed in 190S. They are 
alleged to have been made with more than three-fourths of the Individual 
Indians of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes. These contracts provided. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 401 

among other things, that for services to be rendered by Mr. McMurray and 
his associates they were to receive 10 per cent of all the money received from 
the sale of the residne of tribal property. The residue of the tribal estate 
vested in the Nations, as stated above, is valued at the lowest estimation at 
$35,000,000. For this fee Mr. McMurray and his associates were to expedite 
the sale of the tribal property. There were persons interested in the affairs 
of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations who believed it improper to pay Mr. 
McMurray or anyone else this enormous fee for doing that wliich the United 
States Government is bound by treaty obligations to do without cost to the 
Indians. During the present session of Congress the McMurray contracts 
received considerable attention and after an exhaustive hearing before the 
Committee on Indian Affairs of the United States Senate these contracts were 
surrendered by Mr. Mc]Murray in so far as they affected the tribal property. 
Mr. McMurray admitted that during the five years that these contracts had 
been in existence he had not accomplished the results for which he had been 
employed. Congress then enacted a law prohibiting the making of other con- 
tracts affecting the tribal estate without the consent of the United States. 
The tribal pronerty of these two tribes is now free of any lien or encumbrance 
of whatsoever nature by reason of the contracts executed by individuals. 

The Department of the Interior has at this time authority to sell all of the 
tmallotted land and all of the timberland and all of the sui'face of the segregated 
coal and asplialt Innd belonging to the tribes. Tlie only parts of the tribal 
estate which the Department of the Interior is without authority to sell at this 
time are the deposits of tlie coal and asphalt. No authority has been given to 
sell the coal and asphalt deposits for the reason that the conservationists in 
Congress desire to conserve this great estate as a national resource. The 
United States, however, is bound with treaty obligations to sell the coal and 
asphalt and to divide the funds derived from the sale per capita among the 
Indians. We have no quarrel with those who advocate the conservation of 
national resources, but we contend that the United States should not practice 
the theory of conservation on an estate that it is bound by trenty obligations 
to divide among Indians. The Indians own the property and should be allowed 
to en.ioy the benefits of ownership. If the United States desires to conserve 
this estate it is only fair that the estate should be purchased from the Indians 
by the Government. 

The present administration sterns to be entering upon a program looking 
toward the sale of all tribal property that the Department of the Interior is 
now authorized to sell. 

The Indians desire that the entire estate be sold and the money distributed 
per capita among them. In other words, they desire that the Government fulfill 
the obligations of its treat>' with them. Many of the Indians who entered into 
this agreement with the United States Government have passed and others are 
daily passing into the great beyond without ever having renped the benefits of 
their agreement with the United States and without ever having enjoyed the 
property which is theirs by every legal and moral right. The sale of this 
property and the distribution of funds would be conducive to the best interest 
of Indians. It would give the older Indians who were parties to the treaty 
an opportunity to enjoy their property before their death, and it would give the 
industrious Indians funds with which to improve their allotments. The por- 
tion of the funds belonging to incompetent Indians could be iuvested for the 
improvement of their allotments under the direction of the Depnrtment of the 
Interior. The dependent and incouipetent Indians would become more self- 
reliant after this fund had been distril)uted. They would nndnrstand that there 
would be no further per capita pnyment for them to look forward to and wnit 
for. This condition would create a greater incentive among this class to sup- 
port thomsf'levs froui their allotments instead of waiting idly for the Govern- 
ment to make a payment to them. The sale of this pro])erty would be highly 
beneficial to the geuoral citizenship of the State of Oklahoma as well as the 
Indinns. The distribution of the funds among the Indians would, no doubt, put 
into circulation a great nmount of money, but this would not be the greatest 
benefit that this action would be to the State of Oklahoma. It would cause a 
division and individual ownership of all the segroErnted coal and asphalt and 
tiniber lands. The soiling of all this land in comparatively small tra-^ts to 
individuals would cause great develoTtment. This development would enh'Mice 
the value of the individunl allotments of Indians. And it would be a perform- 
ance, though a tardy one. by the United States Government of the treaty obliga- 

649G9— 15 2G 1 



402 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

tions that it has assumed. It may be argued by those who advocate the strictest 
protection of tlie individual Indian that this property should be held in trust 
for the use and benefit of the Indians. We do not adhere to this view of the 
situation. We believe that every incompetent Indian should be surrounded by 
such conditions that would compel him to retain and develop his allotment. 
Any protection which troes further than this is an injury to the individual. 

In some instances the restrictions upon the alienation of all or a jiortion of 
the allotment of incompetent Indians who are in destitute circumstances or 
sick are removed by the Secretary of the Interior, the land sold, and jiroceeds 
derived therefrom are given to the allottee by the department in installments, 
the department retaining supervision over the proceeds, of course, in order 
to prevent improvident use thereof by the incompetent Indian. 

We are inclined to the theory that the incompetent Indian should be allowed 
to retain his allotment; that the tribal estate should be sold; and that the 
portion of the funds arising from such sale belonging to this class of Indians 
be distributed among them under the supervision of the Department of the 
Interior. We are inclined to believe that this method of caring for incompetent 
Indians would be adopted by the Interior Department if that department had 
power to use tribal funds for that purjtnse. There is more than $10,000,000 in 
cash belonging to the Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians now under the control 
of the United States Government for the use of the Indi:ins. This statement 
of facts brings forth the question. Why is not the portion of these funds belong- 
ing to incomi)etent and destitute Indians used to care for them and improve 
their allotments instead of selling their allotments and using the funds derived 
from the sale? The answer is that no payment of tribal moneys can be made 
to the Indians without authority from Congress and Congress has not given 
the Department of the Interior authority to use tribal funds for this purpose. 
To give the reason why Congress has not authorized a distribution of tribal 
funds it will be necessary to consider the enrollment question. 

In 1896 the United States Government took upon itself the duty of mnking 
the roll of citizenship of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. It continued 
this work for 11 years. The rolls of citizenship of the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Nations were finally closed on March 4. Ifi07. During this period of 11 
years all persons who claimed right to citizenship in these nations were in- 
vited to make application for enrollment. Thousands of applications were 
made by persons residing in different parts of the United States, and especially 
by persons residing in Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Texas, and Arkansas. 
All of these applications, as well as the applications made by persons residing 
in Indian Territory, were litigated and finally adjudicated. All this litigation 
entailed great expense to the tribes. In addition to the regular salary of attor- 
neys employed in citizenship matters one fee of $750 000 was paid to a firm of 
attorneys for defending the nation in these cases. After the adjudication of all 
claims the rolls of citizenship were finally closed, both in conformity to the 
treaty agreement with the Indians and by the operation of the act of Congress. 
The great delay on the part of the United States Government in beginning 
the sale of the residue of the tribal estate and the distribution of the funds 
arising therefrom after the allotment of the Indians and after the closing of 
the rolls caused all the unsuccessful ap])licants for enrollment to believe that 
as long as there was a great residue of tribal property remaining there was 
still hojie for them to secure citizenship in the tribes. These applicants em- 
ployed attorneys to resubmit their claims for citizenship and at the present 
time according to the statements made by the attorneys for claimants who 
have appeared before the Committees on Indian Affairs of Congress, there are 
probably not less than 50.000 persons throughout the United States who have 
employed attorneys to present their claims for rights of citizenship in the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. The contracts which attorneys have taken 
from the claimants for citizenship provide that if the attorney is successful 
in securing enrollment for the clamant he shall receive a fee ranging gener- 
iilly from 25 to 50 ]ier cent of the amount the claimant would obtain by reason 
of citizenship. It is shown by the arguments made by attorneys that a citizen- 
ship in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations is considered to be worth from 
$5,000 to $8,000. It will therefore be seen that if the rolls could be reoi)ened 
and any considerable number of these claimants enrolled it would mean a 
great amount of money in fees for those who hold contracts with the claim- 
ants. This prospect of great fees induces men who have capital to furnish 
their money and influence in an effort to have the rolls reopened. I am advised 
and believe that some of tlie attorneys have capitalized these citizenship con- 



ENBOLLMENT IN TKE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 403 

tracts; that is say, they have pledged their contracts for money with which 
to maintain representation before the committees of Congress to' continuously 
urge the reopening of the rolls, the persons who furnish the money, of course, 
to share in the fees in case the claimants are successful. Those engaged in an 
effort to reopen the rolls appear to be well organized and provided with means 
to make a strong and persistent fight. Up to this time we have successfully 
opposed all efforts to have the rolls reopened. On the other hand, the attor- 
neys for the claimants have successfully opposed all of our efforts to have 
Congress enact a law authorizing a distribution of the funds arising from the 
sale of the tribal e.state. They contend that these funds should remain intact 
until the rights of the claimants can be readjudicated. Our contention is that 
all the applicants have had their day in court and that after 11 years of tedioug 
and expensive litigation the question of enrollment was finally settled. To 
reopen the rolls would be an Injustice to the enrolled citizens of the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations. It would put the entire tribal estate in jeopardy: it 
would emperil the right of every Indian who has an interest in the estate and 
would cause the tribes to again defray the expenses of years of litigation to 
defend their property. In addition to all this, to again reopen the rolls would 
be a violation of the agreement between the Government of the United States 
and the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. The Congress of the United States 
can effectually eliminate the enrollment question by authorizing the Depart- 
ment of the Interior to sell the remainder of the tribal estate and to distribute 
all funds per capital among the citizens of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
The Indians are entitled to this action under the terms of the treaty. 

Mr. CoNERLT. The resolution was based on that article at that 
time. 

!Mr. Hurley. I have asked you if now, at the present time, you 
are not willing to admit that what is stated in that article is true. Is 
it not a fact that there is a syndicate in existence which holds these 
contracts and is furnishing money to force open the rolls of the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations for the enrollment of Mississippi 
Choctaws? Is not that true at this time? 

Mr. CoxERLY. It seems to be true from that information, but it 
was not known to me at that time. The resolutions were not formu- 
lated upon that information at that time, but they were formulated 
upon the article published in the paper. That ought to be explana- 
tory enough for you. 

Mr. Carter. I notice that this statement is embodied in your 
resolution : 

P. J. Hurley, national attorney of the Choctaw Nation, one of the Five Tribes, 
denounced the land interests that were defeating the efforts to have Congress 
distribute $10,000,000 belonging to the Choctaws and Chickasaws and derived 
from the sale of their lands. The failures to distribute these moneys, he 
asserted, was due to attorneys hired by persons who hoped to benefit by prov- 
ing citizenship in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations if the Government should 
reopen the tribal rolls. Such citizenship was worth from $.5000 to $S.OOO, he 
Siiid. and if the rolls were reopened some attorneys would make thousands of 
dollars bec-ause they have taken claimants' cases on contingent fees of from 
25 to 50 per cent. 

Mr. Conerly. That is the Globe-Democrat article. 
Mr. Carter. Now, you deny that in this language : 

And whereas such charges are a thrust at the attorneys of the Mississippi 
Choctaws. Messrs. Thomas B. Crews ;ind Harry J. Gantwell, of St. I>ouis. Mo., 
and the friends and supporters of the Mississippi Choctaws in the Congress ot 
the United States, a libel upon their honor and integrity and a slander upon 
the leaders of the Mississippi Choctaws claiming their rights, etc. 

What I want to know is this : Do you still adhere to this statement 
in which you say that it was a slander and a libel, or do you say that 
what was stated by the attorney for the Choctaw Nation at the Lake 
Mohonk conference was the truth ? 



404 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES, 

Mr. CoNERLY. The slander referred to in this resolution was the 
charge made that these men were engaged in fradulent transactions 
and in a conspiracy to defraud. 

Mr. Carter. Please do not get away from the subject. You set 
out here what your charges are directed to in this resolution. 

Mr. CoNERLY, That was simply copied in there to show what was 
said at the Lake Mohonk conference. 

Mr. Carter. That is all that was said. That is the thing you 
refer to. 

Mr. CoNERLY. I think you are mistaken. 

Mr. Carter. I can not be mistaken about that. 

Mr. CoNERLY. The charge objected to was that the leaders of the 
Mississippi Choctaws were engaged in a scheme and conspiracy to 
defraud 

Mr. Carter. No, sir; that is not the charge at all. The charge 
you speak about here is a charge against the attorneys. 

Mr. CoNERLY. That is only in reference to his speech made as re- 
ported in the newspaper. The article was not incorporated as the 
sentiment of the Society of the Mississippi Choctaws, but for in- 
foi"mation. 

Mr. Carter. You do not seem inclined to answer the question at 
all. Now, in the face of the admission of the attorney himself, do^ 
you still deny that it is true ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. That what is true? 

Mr. Carter, The thing you set out here. I read it to you, and it 
is as plain as it can be. The matter set out here about Mr. Hurley's 
address at a conference of some kind with reference to these attor- 
neys' fees, the organization of that company, etc., for the furtherance 
of this enrollment matter. Now, you declare in your resolution, 
which you say you prepared yourself, that that statement was a 
slander and a libel, and the question I want you to answer is this : In 
the light of the statement made by Mr. Cantwell admitting what was 
charged, do you still say that it is a slander and libel? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Not that part of it. 

Mr. Carter. Why didn't you answer the question to begin with ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Because when the resolutions were formulated they 
were based on the proposition, you understand, that a charge was 
made by Mr. Hurley that the leaders of the Mississippi Choctaws 
were engaged in a scheme to defraud and in fraudulent transactions 
to defeat and to rob the Choctaws. 

Mr. Carter. Now, you can not go outside of the record. Here is 
the record that sets up Avhat was charged. You put in here a state- 
ment of what the charges were. I have no interest in any controversy 
between you and Mr. Hurley or between you and anybody else, but 
I do want you to give the facts in the case. Now, since you admit 
that your statement with reference to this being a slander, libel, etc., 
is untrue, I want to know why you had the Mississippi Choctaws to 
meet and why you had any such resolutions as those passed. What 
was your purpose? 

Mr. CoNERLY. The purpose of the resolutions, as I stated a while 
ago, was that a charge was made, according to the information re- 
ceived there from that article — that a charge was made against the 
leaders of the Mississippi ChoctaAvs to the eifect that they were en- 
gaged in a scheme to defraud the Choctaw Nation. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 405 

Mr. Carter. Who are the leaders of the Mississippi Choctaws? 

Mr. CoNERLY. The men engag:ed in— 

Mr. Carter (interposing). What are their names? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I am one of them. 

Mr. Carter. Is Mr. Cantwell or Mr. Crews one of them ? 

Mr. Conerj.y. They are attorneys. 

Mr. Carter. Are they leaders of the Mississippi Choctaws? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not know whether they are or not. 

Mr. Carter. Yon are speaking of the leaders of the Mississippi 
Choctaws 

Mr. Conerly (interposing). They are the leading members of the 
Mississippi Choctaws. 

Mr. Carter. That reference here w'as to Crews & Cantwell, then. 

Mr. Conerly. Not altogether, but to our society. Our society 
took offense at that, and the chief council took offense at that — that 
is, being charged with being engaged in a scheme to defraud. 

Mr. Carter. Is anything said in the statement made by the attor- 
ney about the leaders of the Mississippi Choctaws? 

Mr. Conerly. The statement is: 

P. J. Hurley, national attorney for the Choctaw Nation, one of the Five 
tribes, denounced the land interests that were defeating the et^orts to have 
Congress distribute $10,000,000 belonging to the Choctaws and Chicltasaws and 
derived from the sale of their lands. The failure to distribute these moneys, 
he asserted, was due to attorneys hired by persons who hoped to benefit by 
proving citizenship in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 

Mr. Carter (interposing). Wait a minute. Does he say any- 
thing there about the leaders of the Mississippi Choctaws? 
Mr, Conerly. The article reads: 

At a convention hold at ^Mohawk, N. T., as related in a dispatch to the St. 
Louis Globe-Democrat, October 23, the attorney for the Choctaw Nation, Mr. 
P. J. Hurley, is reported to have charged that a "plot or conspiracy" was 
formed and at work to "cheat and defraud the Choctaws and Chickasaws 
out of their lands and moneys derived from the sale of their lands." 

The resolutions were based upon that charge of conspiracy to 
cheat and defraud. We had no knowledge of the organization. 

Mr. Carter. Then, you were spealdng without laiowledge — you 
were talking through your hat? 

Mr. Conerly. I was speaking about the sentiment expressed in 
the article published in the St, Louis Globe-Democrat. 

Mr. Carter. But the things you deny in that have afterwards de* 
veloped to be true, have they not? 

Mr, Conerly. As to the organization of that company; yes, sir. 

Mr. HuRr.EY, Was the name of the Mississippi Choctaws, or the 
names of the persons whom you named here, or the name of any 
other person named in that resolution mentioned in the article that 
you read? You say it was an assault on certain persons. 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; no names were mentioned. 

Mr, Hurley. Now, then 

Mr. Conerly (interposing). We regarded it as a sweeping remark 
and as a reflection upon our society, 

-Mr. Hurley, You did not investigate it, but you were willing to 
call me a falsifier without knowing whether your statements were 
true, if in so doing you could advance your cause? Was that the 
position you took? 



406 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir. "Distance lends enchantment to the 
view," and we were not so well informed of things then. So far as 
anything personal was intended, there is a misunderstanding about 
that. 

Mr. Hurley. I do not consider it impersonal. 

Mr. CoNERLY. If you had known me, as, perhaps, you know me 
now, and as I have learned to know you more since I have been in 
Washington City, it is p)robable that those things yould not have 
occurred. 

Mr. Carter. Do you mean by that that it was a deliberate attempt 
to discredit some one ? Is that what you mean ? Do you mean that 
you would not have tried to discredit him if you had been better 
acquainted ? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; I mean that expressions are apt to be made 
at times from wrong information. 

Mr. Carter. You say that you sat down and drew a long set of 
resolutions, and you must have deliberated before you drew those 
resolutions. You must have carefully considered them. You cer- 
tainly would not want to say that you presented resolutions to a 
meeting of that character without having considered them carefully 
and deliberately. Now, you admit that what you stated in these 
resolutions was not true. Do you still want the record to show that 
you have done that, and that no one else assisted in the writing of 
these resolutions, that no one else knew anything about them, and 
that you got no information from anyone else except what was 
stated in the St. Louis Globe-Democrat article? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Mr. Chairman, general reputation has much to do 
with these things. General reputation or information of general 
reputation has much to do with these things. We knew that every 
effort was being made by the attorneys for the Choctaws west to 
defeat the Mississippi Choctaws' case, and we are very sensitive on 
those points. Besides, these things coming out in a newspaper in 
that manner made us take it for granted that Mr. Hurley had per- 
sonal feeling in the matter, and that he was disposed to charge us 
with being engaged in a fraudulent transaction. 

Mr. Carter. But he does not say anything about you. 

Mr. Conerly. Now, when there comes a charge of a scheme to 
defraud 

Mr. Carter (interposing). As a matter of fact, it was not your 
pride as a leader of the Mississippi Choctaws that was pricked, but 
it was your pride as an attorney in getting up these contracts that 
was pricked — is not that true? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not understand you. 

Mr. Carter. Is it not a fact that it was not your pride as a Mis- 
sissippi Choctaw leader that was hurt, but that you felt that your 
connection with the work of getting up these contracts was assailed — 
is not that true? Let us be perfectly frank about it. 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir; I felt that I was assailed. 

Mr. Carter. You did not feel that you were assailed because you 
were a Mississippi Choctaw, but that you were assailed because you 
had been connected with these contracts ? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; my name was not mentioned. No one's 
name was mentioned, but I felt I was assailed. 

Mr. Carter. How much money have you drawn all told in con- 
nection with this matter? 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 407 

Mr. CoNERLY. T can not tell you that exactly. 

Mr. Carter, Can you approximate it? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I can approximate about how much money I have 
received by way of expenses. I do not know how much I have re- 
ceived in the way of notary's fees. All of that depends upon the 
contracts themselves. The contracts show where they appeared 
before me. During February, March, April, May, June, July, and 
August, or seven months, I received $350. Now, I was entitled to 
$50 for five months more of that year. 

Mr. Carter. Did you get it? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. I want to know what you got. 

Mr. Cokerly. That money was expended in printing and 

Mr. Carter (interposing). I do not care anything about printing 
expenses. I want to know what you received. 

Mr. CoNERLY (continuing). And in organizing the Mississippi 
Choctaws. There were $350 altogether that I got. Then Judge 
Crews sent me about — I do not think he sent me over four or five 
hundred dollars. 

Mr. Carter. Are you positive that he did not send you over that 
amount ? 

Mr. Conerly. I have not my check book with me. If I had my 
check book with me I could give it exactly; but I think I received 
in all about $500 for him — that is my recollection — to pay expenses. 
That would be approximately about $850. That is for two years, 
and that was money sent me to pay my expenses. 

Mr. Carter. That is all you received? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. How much was paid out for this organization and 
for the printing you were talking about ? 

Mr. Conerly. About $250. They paid that out themselves. They 
paid for it, but it came out of my wages. That would be about 
$1,100. I never got that $250. That went on our payment for 
printing the constitution, etc. 

Mr. Carter. That was for the organization of the Society of the 
Mississippi Choctaws ? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. So this organization of the Mississippi Choctawg 
was effected by moneys furnished you by Cantwell & Crews? 

Mr. Conerly. They did not pay it. It was money due me. It was 
my money. 

]Mr. Carter. I understand that it was money paid you by Cantwell 
& Crews? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. How much did this man Powell get? 

Mr. Conerly. Powell is in no way connected with the Mississippi 
Choctaw Society. 

Mr. Carter. Is he a Mississippi Choctaw? 

Mr. Conerly. He claims to be. I do not Icnow what he is. 

Mr. Carter. Now, then, here are $1,100. Did you never get any 
money for coming* to Washington ? Did you get your expenses 
paid ? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. How much did that amount to? 



408 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. CoNERLY. Powell paid my expenses to Washington and my 
expenses home. 

Mr. Carter. How much did you get for that? 

Mr. CoNERLr. I did not get anything except my expenses. 

Mr. Carter. How much was it? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not know what the expenses amounted to. I 
think the Pullman carfare from Gulfport here is $35, and it is $35 
going back. 

Mr. Carteu. That is $70. 

Mr. Con EEL Y. Here and return. 

Mr. Carter. How many trips have you made here? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I think this was the third trip. 

Mr. Carter. AVho is paying j^our expenses now ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Mr. Cantwell is paying them now. Mr. Masterson 
is to pay my expenses to Washington about the last of August. 

Mr. Carter. I do not understand that. 

Mr. CoNERLY. Mr. Masterson sent me a check to pay my expenses 
to Washington the latter part of August. 

Mr. Carter. This last August ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. This is August. It was July. I got here the latter 
part of June and was here the Fourth of July. 

Mr. Carter. Who is Mr. Masterson. 

Mr. CoNERLY. Harris Masterson is a lawyer, living at Houston, 
Tex. 

Mr. Carter. What connection has he with this matter ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. He is said to have an interest in this business. 

Mr. Carter. How does he get an interest ? 

Mr. CoisERLY. I do not know. 

Mr. Carter. Don't you know that Mr. Masterson was an organizer 
of the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co.? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I find that from the record. 

Mr. Carter. Do you w^ant the committee to understand, and do you 
want it to appear in this record, that you claim that you know abso- 
sutely nothing about the organization of the Texas-Oklahoma Invest- 
ment Co., while an officer of that company is paying your expenses 
to Washington City? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I did not know it at that time. I have learned that 
those facts existed since I have been here in Washington City. 

Mr. Carter. How did you know that Mr. Masterson would pay 
your expenses ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. My understanding was that Mr. Masterson was in 
some way connected with Crews & Cantwell. I did not know any- 
thing about the organization of the syndicate. 

Mr. Carter. But you knew that these contracts were being 
financed ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. They had to be financed by somebody, 
tions for 

Mr. Carter. Did you know that at the time you prepared these 
resolutions for the Mississippi Choctaw Society? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Did I know that the organization existed? 

Mr. Carter. Did you know that the Mississippi Choctaw proposi- 
tion was being financed? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 409 

Mr. Carter. Wliy did you put this statement in here, that the 
charges made by this attorney Avere false ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I did not know who was financing it. 

Mr. Carter. You Imew it was financed, but you did not know who 
was financing it? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I got my money from Crews & Cantwell. 

Mr. Carter. You just said that you got it from Masterson? 

Mr. Conerly. That was for July. 

Mr. Carter. You have received altogether $1,360, $850 of which 
was salary and expenses, according to your statement, $250 for the 
organization of the Mississippi Choctaw Society, and $210 expenses 
coming to Washington, that is railroad fare — I do not know who 
paid your expenses when here. All of this money was paid to you 
by Powell, Crews & Cantwell, and Mr. Masterson, who was one of 
the- officials of the Texas-Oklahoma Co., and all of them belonged 
to the Texas-Oklahoma Co., and you now tell us that you never 
knew about the existence of the company ? 

Mr. Conerly. I understood Mr. Masterson to be a partner of Crews 
& Cantwell. I did not know anything about the organization of 
the syndicate at that time. I have learned since I have been here 
that the organization existed. 

Mr. Carter. And you, one of the men connected with the matter, 
have not been kept fully informed of its machinations? 

Mr. Conerly. I was only an emploj^ee. 

Mr. Carter. Then you want the committee to understand that the 
machinations of this Texas-Oklahoma Co. have been kept so secret 
that you, one of the members interested in the matter, were not fully 
informed as to how it was being financed and did not know any- 
thing about it until it was brought out by the McLaughlin report? 

Mr. Conerly. I was an employee, a hired agent to do this work, 
I did not figure in those matters that did not concern me. That is 
the plain fact. I was an employee; I was hired, and my mind has 
been on the business. 

Mr. Cartter. You were interested, you were getting a salary, you 
owned some of the contracts, and with all of that the manipulators 
of this proposition did not keep you informed as to how the money 
would be procured to finance the proposition and you did not even 
know of the organization of the Texas-Oklahoma Co. to finance it. 
In fact you are unable to say whether your pay arid expenses were 
from legitimate sources or not ? So far as your knowledge goes the 
money you accepted may have come from the Red Cross Society, 
Sunday-school contributons, train-robbery swag, or political slush- 
fund? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not see any use to reiterate my reply a dozen 
times when I say to you positively that I knew nothing abrut the 
organization of the syndicate until I came to Washington this July. 
I was employed by Crews & Cantwell to write up these claims, and 
my mind was on the business and not on the financial affairs of the 
concern. I had nothing to do with the financial affairs. 

Mr. Carter. But at the same time you accepted salary and ex- 
penses from Mr. Masterson, Mr. Cantwell, and Mr. Powell? 

Mr. Conerly. As an employee, an agent; that is all. 



410 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr, Carter. Let me ask you something about these contracts. 
There has been some dispute as to how many there are, and I just 
Want to know. 

Mr. CoNERLY. You can not arrive at the accurate number, you can 
only approximate it. 

Mr. Carter. Why can not you arrive at the accurate number? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Because you can not remember them; I can not 
remember them. 

Mr. Carter. Are not the contracts in existence ? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir ; they are packed in boxes. 

Mr. Carter. Why can not they be produced ? 

Mr. Conerly. I can produce them here to-morrow, 

Mr. Carter. I would like to have all of them laid on this table. 

Mr. Conerly. I can bring you a couple of hundred. 

Mr. Carter. Can not you produce all of them? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. All of your contracts ? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; they are in the hands of Judge Crews at 
St. Louis, Mo. 

Mr. Carter. Those contracts are in the hands of Judge Crews, and 
you say you know nothing of the financing of the Texas-Oklahoma 
Co.? 

Mr. Conerly. Those contracts are in the hands of Judge Crews 
with the understanding that he is to present them in my behalf. 

Mr. Carter. Have they been financed ? 

Mr. Conerly. Financed through Judge Crews. 

Mr. Carter. With the Texas-Oklahyma Co. ? 

Mr. Conerly. No. That is an individual matter. These con- 
tracts were put in the hands of Judge Crews to present in my behalf, 
and if they go through then I am to receive a contingent fee. 

Mr. Carter. What do you mean by " financed" ; did Judge Crews 
furnish the money? 

Mr. Conerly. Judge Crews furnished me with money to pay my 
expenses. 

Mr. Carter. And he holds the contracts? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; only as an attorney. I delivered them into 
his keeping to represent me in case the contracts should ever be 
presented to the Interior Department. 

Mr. Carter. To represent your clients before the Interior De- 
partment? 

Mr. Conerly. In other words, he is to take my place in presenting 
those contracts; just like this, I put a note in your hands, and you 
go before the court and collect it. 

Mr. Carter. And get a part of the money? 

Mr. Conerly. And get a fee, of course. 

Mr. Carter. Can you give us definite information as to how many 
contracts Cantwell & Crews have and how many they have hypothe- 
cated with the Texas-Oklahoma Co.? 

Mr. CoNERLr. No, sir. I can aproximate it, but I can not give 
Vou the exact number. I would not undertake to do that without the 
index. 

Mr. Ballinger. Are not several thousands of the contracts taken 
by Crews & Cantwell right in Washington to-day ? 

Mr. Conerly. That I took for Crews & Cantwell? 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 411 

Mr. Ballingek. That Crews & Cantwell hold and you have an 
interest in? 

Mr. CoNERLr. I have no interest in the contracts held by Crews 
& Cantwell. They have, as I told you, 3,800 contracts in their office 
here, boxed up in a fireproof safe, but I have no personal interest 
in them. I had nothing to do with those contracts. 

Mr. Ballinger. They have 3,800 contracts in the Munsey Building 
in Washington? 

Mr. CoNEKLY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. As a matter of fact, are not those contracts in the 
hands of the Texas-Oklahoma Co.? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not know. Mr. Cantwell has control of them. 

Mr. Carter. But you know about 2,258 contracts taken by some- 
body else for Mr. William B. Matthews; is that the right number? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. How many? 

Mr. Conerly. I can only give you my recollection. 

Mr. Carter. How many do you recall? 

Mr. Comerly. If you will give me a chance I will tell you. My 
recollection is that the original index of those cases taken from Mr. 
Matthews's office and transferred, most of them were taken over 
there by myself, that the index shows 2,558 cases. 

Mr. Carter. Two thousand five hundred and fifty-eight cases? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. Let me explain a little further. 

Mr. Carter. That is 300 more than stated here. 

Mr. Conerly. Now, wait. After I went back to Mississippi I 
wrote to the stenographer to send me a copy of the index, and the 
copy of the index sent to me shows some 2,200 cases. There is a dis- 
crepancy between the number shown by the original index and that 
sent me by the stenographer. 

Mr. Carter. Either 2,258 or 2,558? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir ; I am strongly of the impression that there 
were 2,558 cases. 

Mr. Carter. Do you know anything about 1,300 contracts turned 
in to Crews & Cantwell during 1912 and the early part of 1913? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir; I know all about them. 

Mr. Carter. Were they turned over? 

Mr. Conerly. No, not all of them to Crews & Cantwell; 1,000 were 
turned over to Cantwell and I brought them to Washington City 
myself. 

Mr. Carter. What became of the other 300? 

Mr. Conerly. The other 300 Judge Crews and I arranged to 
transfer to me individually. 

Mr. Carter. Do you know anything about 1,800 contracts which 
vou wrote some time last month and turned over to Crews & Cant- 
well ? 

Mr. Conerly. They were not taken in the name of Crews & Cant- 
well ; they were taken in the name of Judge Crews. The number is 
correct. 

Mr. Carter, Are you still engaged in taking contracts? 

Mr. Conerly. I was up to the time T left home. 

Mr. Carter. How many Mississippi Choctaws are there? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not know. 

Mr. Carter. How many would you judge? 



412 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. CoNERLY. I have no idea. There are a lot of people down 
there who have never put in their names who are seeking to do so 
now, and there is a large number in Mr. Morgan's district in Loui- 
siana. 

Mr. Carter. How many do you think there are? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No man has any idea. 

Mr. Carter. How many do you think there are that you have not 
contracts with now? 

Mr. CoNERLY. It would be impossible for me to say. 

Mr. Carter. A good many? 

]Mr. Comerly. I have not taken all the contracts. Powell has been 
down there taking contracts. 

Mr. Carter. Outside of your contracts? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. You do not know how many he has taken ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir ; I have not seen Powell in 30 months. 

Mr. Carter. Can you tell us approximately how many there are 
who have not been contracted with at all? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir. I do not know how many Powell has taken 
or Avho he has taken them for. 

Mr. Carter. According to your statement there are 9,458 Missis- 
sippi Choctaws with whom you know contracts have been written? 

Mr. CoNERLY. That is all I know anything about. 

Mr. Carter. In addition to those, you would say that Powell has 
taken how many? 

Mr. Conerly. I have not any idea. 

Mr. Carter. He is a pretty active man? 

Mr. CoKERLY. I have not seen Powell since February, 1912. 

Mr. Carter. Powell is a pretty active fellow in taking contracts? 

Mr. Conerly. He has been ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. How long has lie been taking contracts since you split 
with him? 

Mr. Conerly. My knowledge about it is from hearsay, Mr. Carter. 
I do not know anything about Powell's work. 

Mr. Carter. When was it you quit working with him? 

Mr. Conerly. In December, 1911. That was when I came to 
Washington. 

Mr. Carter. About three years ago? 

Mr. Conerly. That was when I quit working with him. 

Mr. Carter. It would be reasonable to suppose that Powell had 
taken four or five thousand? 

Mr. Conerly. It has not been three years. 

Mr. Carter. It will be three years in December. 

Mr. Conerly. Next December. It was in 1911 when I quit work- 
ing with him. I have not seen him since February, 1912. 

Mr. Carter. That was the last you knew of any contracts he was 
taking. That will be three years in December? 

Mr. Conerly. The coming December; yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. This is August, not very far from December. 

Mr. Conerly. Two and one-half years. 

Mr. Carter. More than two and one-half years. September, Octo- 
ber, November, and December — four months until December. Would 
it be reasonable to suppose that Powell had gotten three or four thou- 
sand contracts in that time? 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 413 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not think so. 

Mr. Carter. A thousand? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not think so. 

Mr. Carter. Five hundred? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not think so. 

Mr. Carter. One hundred? 

Mr. CoNERLY. In 1910, when Powell opened his offices in Bay St. 
Louis and Biloxi, there was a rush on him from all parts of the State 
of Mississippi and other States. I think that with the 3,800 contracts 
that he took at that time and the 2,500 that he took for William B. 
Matthews, and then deducting from that the number I have taken 
for Crews & Cant well, the number would not run up to 1,000 that he 
could have taken since that time. 

Mr. Carter. Five hundred? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I have taken altogether about 3,000 cases since 1912. 
I do not think with the circulars sent out by Crews & Cantwell and 
with the knowledge that the people derived from them and other 
things that Powell could have taken more than 1,000 cases in that 
time. 

Mr. Carter. The circulars you sent out were to prevent Powell 
from taking contracts after he had refused to take them further for 
Crews & Cantwell ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Those circulars were sent out to notify the people of 
the condition and also of the connection of Mr. Powell. 

Mr. Carter. And they had that effect ? 

Mr. CoNERLY'. The circular was intended to have that effect — to 
keep people from employing a man who was charging them a fee. 

Mr. Carter. We will say that Powell had taken 1,000 cases. That 
is 10,458. I understand that other attorneys have contracts with 
almost as many people as Cantwell & Crews and Powell, so that in 
all that would make at least twenty to thirty thousand Mississippi 
Choctaws who are off of the rolls? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not know anything about that. 

Mr. Carter. Do you think all the fellows you took contracts from 
were entitled to receive benefits as Mississippi Choctaws? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I have been very cautious in getting information 
from them. I have gone to many of them and learned from their 
own lips who they descended from. I know of a good many grand- 
children who knew their grandparents living in Louisiana and Mis- 
sissippi. I have been very particular to be satisfied that those people 
would be able to trace their ancestry back to 1830. 

Mr. Carter. You think all of the people you have taken contracts 
with are bona fide Choctaw citizens? 
■ Mr. CoNERLY. Those I have taken individually, I think so. 

Mr. Carter. How many have you taken individually? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Three thousand eight hundred; you must cut that; 
you must cut also the 2,500 that were taken by Powell for Ma'tthews, 
which I am not responsible for. 

Mr. Carter. Did Powell write up his contracts first or after you 
wrote yours ? 

Mr. Conerly. The 3,800 were taken in 1910 by Powell for Crews & 
Cantwell, and the 2,500 were taken for William B. Matthews by 
Powell. 



414 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Mr. Carter. Were the 3,800 taken before you began to take con- 
tracts for Crews & Cantwell? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Were the 2,500? 

Mr. CoNERLY, Yes, sir 

Mr. Carter. It is reasonable to suppose that this man Powell, 
having knowledge of all the matters, would have first gone to the 
bona fide Indians and secured their contracts before he went to 
others. Would not that be the natural assumption? 

Mr. Conerly. He would, possibly. 

Mr. Carter. Would he not first go to the people that he thought 
were entitled to be put on the rolls? 

Mr. Conerly. Of course. 

Mr. Carter. I have been trying to get you gentlemen to bring 
those contracts here and lay them on the table. 

Mr. Conerly. I brought them here yesterday. I will bring them 
here again. 

Mr. Carter. I want to know why they are kept hidden ? 

Mr. Conerly. They are not hidden; they are simply put away to 
keep them from being destroyed. 

Mr. Carter. They will not be destroyed while with this committee. 

Mr. Conerly. I know that. They might be burned if not put in 
a safe place. They have to be put in a fireproof vault. 

Mr. Carter. You say that you are a Mississippi Choctaw ? 

Mr. CoNNERLY. I am a descendent on one side. 

Mr. Carter. Being a Mississippi Choctaw, you ought to have in- 
formation about your own people, and yet you are utterly unable to 
tell me whether there are 5,000 or 10,000 Mississippi Choctaws off of 
the roll? 

Mr. Conerly. Let me tell you what my information is. 

Mr. Carter. That is what I am trying to get at. 

Mr. Conerly. After the treaty of 1880 and after certain things had 
occurred, the Mississippi Choctaws scattered. They are grouped in 
various States. There are more of the Mississippi Choctaws in Mr. 
Harrison's district, I think, than in any other district that I know 
of, but they range over Mr. Harrison's district, Mr. Witherspoon's 
district, and Mr. Sisson's district, a few in Mr. Quinn's district, not 
many, and in Mr. Morgan's district in Louisiana, in New Orleans, 
and adjoining parishes. 

Mr. Carter. You are getting away from the question. I want to 
know if you have any figures as to how many Mississippi Choctaws 
there are. You say you have been working on this matter, that you 
have taken contracts, you live in Mississippi where most of them are, 
and you say that you have taken contracts in 15 States? 

Mr. Conerly. They are scattered, and being scattered, you can 
not approximate the number in the aggregate; it is impossible. 

Mr. -Carter. Do you think there are 10,000? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Twenty thousand ? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not know about that. There might be 10,000 
descendants who would be able to prove that they were descendants 
of ancestors of 1830. There might be 10,000 who would be able to 
get on the loll. I do not know. That would depend upon the 
evidence that they woidd be able to make. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 415 

Mr. Carter. What proof would they have to make? 

Mr. CoNERLY. They would have to show that they were descendants 
from ancestors of 1830. 

Mr. Carter. Do you think that there are 10,000 people living to-day 
who could show that they were descendants of people who drew land 
or who were entitled to benefits under the treaty of 1830? 

Mr. CoKERLY. My information is that 4,000 Mississippi Choctaws 
remained in Mississippi in 1830. How many would accumulate from 
that time? 

Mr. Carter. I am not talking of how many there might be, but 
the number that can establish their right to go upon, the rolls as 
descendants of those people. 

Mr. CoNERLY. There is not a man in the United States who can 
approximate the number without taking a census. 

Mr. Carter. Your statement, as I understood it, was that there 
are 10,000 Mississippi Choctaws who could prove that they were 
descendants? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I say that there might be. You must allow me to 
qualify. 

Mr. Carter. That is another matter. 

Mr. CoisERLY. I make no positive statement, because I know that 
is impossible. 

Mr. Carter. You do not think the people you represent, unless 
they can establish that ancestry, should be placed on the rolls? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Of course not. 

Mr. Carter. You do not think that unless they can establish their 
relationship to some man who had a right to draw land in Mississippi 
as a Choctaw or Chickasaw that they should be placed on the roll? 

Mr. Co^iERLY. I do not think they should. Now, I want to qualify 
that. You may call it a qualification or whatever you please. I have 
been applied to by people to try and get in their names, and I have 
positively refused to take them. I have refused to take people from 
Louisiana who claimed they were full-blood Indians, because they 
could not show me that they were in any way connected with the 
Mississippi Choctaws. 

Mr. Carter. I notice in this report that there are some people 
called " Ked Bones." Did you ever hear of them? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Are they Choctaws ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. They are said to be. They are in western Louisiana. 
That is something that has come to light since. Powell was over 
there last year. That investigation came out up there. I have not 
been over in that country at all, taking contracts. These people 
denominated "Red Bones" in that country, I understand, were orig- 
inally descendants of the Choctaws. They look almost like full 
bloods, if not full bloods. I was over in that section of the country 
in 18G6 and 1867 and saw many of those people. They are no doubt 
Indians. They claim to be Choctaws. That is all I know. 

Mr. Cari-er. What makes you say they are Indians? 

Mr. Conerly. They claimed to be Indians at that time, and they 
have the appearance of Indians. 

Mr. Carter. What is that appearance? 

Mr. Conerly. The color and the hair. 



416 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Mr. Carter. The hair is perfectly straight? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir; and black, like all Indians that I have ever 
seen. 

Mr. Carter. Are the eyes black? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I would call the " Red Bones " Indians. 

Mr. Carter. The eyes and hair are black? 

Mr. Co^ERLY. I can not say all of them. I saw them in 1867 and 
1868. 

Mr. Carter. Is it your contention that all Indians have black hair 
and eyes? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I have never seen what was termed a full-blooded 
Indian but what had black hair. There are many descendants of the 
Choctaws who have light hair and black eyes. Some have gray eyes. 
That is a characteristic among descendants of the Mississippi Choc- 
taws. I believe that those people who are denominated " Red Bones " 
are Indians. 

There is another statement which I wish to make. I have been 
applied to several times by people to get in their names and refused 
to take them, and have explained to them that under no circumstances 
would I take a contract from anyone and fasten upon the Choctaw 
Nation the payment of an unjust claim that I knew of. I would not 
instill in the minds of anyone the hope of receiving anything when 
I knew they could not get it. I would not put anybody on the roll 
who could not prove that he was a legitimate descendant of an ances- 
tor of 1830 under the Dancing Rabbit Creek treaty. 

Mr. Hurley. Do you mean if he could not prove that he was the 
descendant of one who had rights under the fourteenth article? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir ; that is what I mean. I would not take a 
contract from anybody unless he was able to prove to my satisfac- 
tion that he comes under the fourteenth article of the treaty. 

Mr. Ballinger. You are a lawyer, are you not? 

Mr. Conerly. I am a lawyer by profession. 

Mr. Ballinger. Could you in your own case prove that the ances- 
tors through whom you claim were entitled to benefits under the 
fourteenth article — that is, could you submit such proof as would be 
accepted by the courts? 

Mr. Conerly. I think so. That would be a question to be deter- 
mined by the Interior Department upon examination of the proof 
that I w^ould offer. 

Mr. Carter. Let me read you something. Here is what Inspector 
McLaughlin said about " Red Bones." He does not quite agree with 
you as to their general appearance — straight hair, etc. He says this: 

Mr. C. R. Cline, an attorney of Lake Chai-le;^, La., and Hon. Isaac C. Boyd, 
of Leesvillc. La., also an attorney, a member of the present Louisiana Assembly, 
and who claims to i)ossess Choctaw Indian blood, both informed me that 
there are about 300 persons living in the neighborhood of Kinder, Allen Parish, 
La., who are of mixed descent, being of French, Spanish, Portugese, and negro 
blood, with a very few of them possibly possessing some Indian blood, and the 
name "Red Bone" was given those of them who were supposed to have any 
Indian blood; that prior to Powell's visit to Kinder soliciting contracts with 
Indians it wns regarded a great insult to be called a "Red Bone," thus classing 
them as of Indian blood, but a number of them were advised by Powell that 
they were of Choctaw descent, as shown by a book which he i)ossessed and by 
which he traced their ancestry, as eligible to enrollment, and it is alleged that 
he thus obtained contracts from all of them, and since Powell thus recognized 
those people, the name " Red Bone " is no longer objectionable, but, on the 
contrary, all are desirous of being thus classed, and to be now called a "Red 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 417 

Bone" is exceedingly pleasing to each and all of tlieiu, as they believe that 
the cognomen fixes their status as of Indian blood, and entitles them to share 
in the property of the Chocaw Nation of Oklahoma. 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not know anything about that, Mr. Carter. I 
will say this to you, that the result of my investigations in taking 
proof.in Louisiana and Mississippi is that there ha"s been an admix- 
ture of French, Spanish, English, Dutch, and Americans with the 
Choctaws of Mississippi. It is a fact and a historical fact that the 
Choctaws assimilated with the white people as far back as 1G99 
at the time of the establishment of Biloxi, Miss, The histories that I 
have read and the information that I have derived from long years 
of study 

Mr. Carter (interposing). Let me ask you if those Indians are 
mixed with negroes any? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. The Choctaws have mixed with negroes ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not know that they were Choctaws. 

Mr. Carter. I am talking about the Choctaws. Have they mixed 
with negroes ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I can give you instances that I know of. 

Mr. Carter. How are the Indians treated in Mississippi? Are 
the full bloods treated as white people or negroes ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not know how the full bloods are treated. 
There are no full bloods near where I live. In Jackson County there 
is what you might term a tribe of people, or descendants of Missis- 
sippi Choctaws, that have been denied the use of the public schools 
on account of their Indian blood. 

Mr. Carter. Well, are they permitted to ride in the same cars 
with white people? You have a Jim Crow law there, have you not? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes. sir. 

Mr. Carter. Do they ride with the white people or with the 
negroes? 

Mr. CoNERLY. With white people, the Indians do. 

Mr. Carter. Those people you were just speaking of? 

Mr. Conerly. I have seen them do it. 

Mr. Carter. I am referring to those particular Indians who are 
excluded from the white schools — are they permitted to ride in the 
same cars with white people? 

Mr. Conerly. Those educated in the white schools are mixed with 
the Caucasian race. 

Mr. Carter. You spoke about a certain class of descendants of 
Choctaw Indians who are excluded from the white schools 

]\Tr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Are tliey permitted to ride in the coaches with white 
people, or do they ride with the colored people? .• 

Mr. Conerly. 1 think they are permitted to ride with white people. 

Mr. RiriiARDSON. Did you ever see one of them on a train? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; I never saw one on a train. I have seen 
some Indian girls in Harrison County on a train who were said to be 
full-blood Indians, and they were with white ladies. 

Mr. Carter. They went as servants. 

Mr. Conerly. No. sir: they Avere raised in the family as their 
children and were educated. 

64969—15 27 



418 ENKOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. Cari'er. What facilities for education are afforded the full- 
blood Choctaws in Mississippi ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not think there are any facilities at all in Mis- 
sissippi for the full bloods. 

Mr. Carter. You provide schools for the white people there, do 
you not ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. We provide schools for the white people. 

Mr. Cari'er. And for the negroes? 

Mr. Comerly. For the two classes, white and colored. 

Mr. Carter. You provide schools there for the white people and 
the negroes? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Cari-er. But you make no provision whatever for full-blood 
Choctaws there? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir. What education they get they get through 
their ministers, and probably from negro schools where they would 
go into them. I called on a minister in Jackson County once. He is 
a white man, but his wife is an Indian woman. He stated there had 
been no schools for 40 years except what they had for themselves; 
that they were not allowed to go into the public schools of Mississippi, 
except in the negro schools, and some of the Indian young men told 
me that they would not do it. I have been trying or making an effort 
to get the Mississippi Legislature, or I hope to do it, to establish 
schools for their special benefit. 

Mr. Carter. So the State of Mississippi provides schools for ne- 
groes and for white people, but they make no provision whatever for 
the full-blood Indians? 

Mr. CoNERLY. None that I know of, except for the descendants of 
those married with whites. 

Mr. Carter. Do they permit them to attend the white schools? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Their descendants do. 

Mr. Carter. But do any of the full bloods in Mississippi? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I do not think they do. 

Mr. Carter. Do you know whether they do or not ? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not know. 

Mr. Carter. You say that you are a one-fourth Choctaw? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not think so. I think probably I am about 
one-sixth. 

Mr. Carter. Have the Indians in Mississippi any racial pride as 
they have in other States? Do they have any pride in being 
Indians? 

Mr. Conerly. I have never heard any of them express themselves 
any other v^ay. 

Mr» Carter. Do they deny the fact that they are Indians? 

Mr. Conerly. I never heard of any of them denying it. 

Mr. Carter. How long have you known that no provision was 
made at all for the education of full-blood Mississippi Choctaws? 
How long has that been going on? 

Mr, Conerly. Well, I have known that we had only two classes in 
Mississippi under our segregation laws, and that was white and 
colored. 

Mr. Carter. How long have you know^n that the Indians had no 
educational facilities at all in Mississippi — that is the full bloods? 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 419 

Mr. CoNERLY. I have learned that in the last two years; this is, 
that they had no school facilities. In Jackson County I talked with 
a member of the school hoard on that question, and I asked him why 
they did not ]5ro\ide schools for the Indians in his county, and he 
told me that there were only two classes; that they could go into the 
colored schools, but that they refused to do it. They offered to give 
them a school, or to eHtal)lish a school for them, provided they 
would accept it as a colored school, but they would not do it. 

Mr. Carter. How long ago was that? 

Mr. CoNERLT. I saAv a good many of those people 

Mr. Carter (interposing). How long ago was this, when you were 
talking with this man ? 

Mr. Co>;ehly. I think that was last year some time. 

Mr. Carter. Have you made anj^ effort at all to try to get educa- 
tional facilities for the full-blood Indians that you say are your own 
flesh and blood? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; I have never made any effort in that way 
myself, because I have never been in politics. 

Mr. Carter. It is not a question of politics. 

Mr. Conerly. I have been so situated in life, in my lifetime, that 
I could not take any active part in those things. 

Mr. Carter. I want to tell you that I am Indian, and if any at- 
tempt was made in Oklahoma or any other State that I was connected 
with to try to exclude Indian people from the white man's schools 
and to put them in negro schools there would be a riot, and it would 
not be any two or three years starting either. But the people of 
Oklahoma freely accept all character of Indians on an absolute 
equality without evasion or subterfuge. 

Mr. Conerly. I think the Misissippi Indian has been wrongly 
treated in that respect. 

Mr. Carter. But knowing that, you have done nothing to remedy 
that condition. 

Mr. Conerly. I have taken no active part in important public mat- 
ters because of conditions in my life that I could not overcome. I 
have taken more interest in the matter in the last few years since 1 
have learned more about it. I have been a common farmer all my 
life more than anything else 

Mr. Carter. Since engaging in this work of securing contracts you 
have been a farmer? 

Mr. Conerly. No. sir; I have not. I was a farmer up to about 
1902, I believe. 

Mr. Carter. This is Maj. McLaughlin — -you know him, I believe? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. I would like for Mr. Harrison to be here now. Maj. 
McLaughlin, this paragraph from your report on page 25 was read 
to Mr. Conerly: 

The said Luke W. Conerly is 73 years of age and a lawyer by profession, but 
has not praftlced in the courts for several years past. He is quite intelliirent, 
li(\-irs a ixond name in the coiinnnnity, and is well spoken of by those who know 
hiu). lie claims to be a lineal descendant of one of the leading Choctaw faniiliea 
who participated in the Dancing Rabbit Creek treaty of LS30, and stated that 
he is now regarded by all the Choctaws living outside of Oklahoma as their 
cajitain and recognized leader; also that it was he who first interested Con- 
gressman Harrison, of Mississippi, in Choctaw matters and got him to intro- 
duce the bill for reopening the Choctaw rolls; that he had interested United 



420 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

States Senators Williams and Vardaman, of Mississippi, in the Choctaw claim ; 
also Congressman Morgan, of Louisiana, in whose district many Choctaws 
reside. 

Now, Mr. Conerly denies having made that statement. 

Mr. CoNEKLY. No, sir; not exactly. That statement was explained 
by saying that there was a running conversation between Mr. Mc- 
Laughlin and myself which extended over a period of perhaps three 
hours. 

Mr. Carter. Then you do not deny it ? 

Mr. CoisERLY. That I got Mr. Harrison 

Mr. Carter (interposing). You do not deny that you made that 
statement ? 

Mr. Conerly. My statement was given there. It was explained. 

Mr. Carter. Then you come before this committee of your own 
volition, and we did not summon you. You asked permission to come 
before the committee, and now I ask you whether the statement 
quoted above, from the McLaughlin report, is or is not correct? 

Mr. Conerly. I think there is a misunderstanding with Maj. Mc- 
Laughlin with regard to my meaning at that time. I expressed, or 
said, that I saw or met Mr. Harrison on one accasion and talked to 
him about Powell wanting to see Mr. Harrison in regard : 

Mr. Carter (interposing). Did you or did you not make that state- 
ment to Maj. McLaughlin? 

Mr. Conerly. That I got Mr. Harrison to do it? 

Mr. Carter. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Conerly, I have no recollection of having made that statement. 

Mr. Carter. Do you know that you did not make that statement? 

Mr. Conerly. We had a conversation in regard to it 

Mr. Carter. You did have a conversation with Mr. Harrison with 
regard to introducing the bill? 

Mr. Conerly. The matter was brought up, but I do not remember 
the exact conversation. 

Mr. Carter. Your memory is not sufficiently refreshed at this time 
for you to deny that you did make it ? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not remember making any such statement. I 
may have stated that I was instrumental in doing it in that one way^ 
or that I was indirectly instrumental. It is a fact that I may have 
been instrumental. I had spoken to Mr. Harrison with reference to 
the Mississippi Choctaws and with regard to Powell's wish to see 
him, and when I came to Washington I expressed the opinion that 
Mr. Harrison was the logical man to introduce the bill, supported by 
Mr. Wickliffe, of Louisiana. It was my desire that Mr. Harrison 
do so, but I never talked with Mr. Harrison outside of Gulfport. I 
never spoke to him on the question in Washington. It is a misun- 
derstanding. I look upon Maj. McLaughlin as a nice gentleman 
and a truthful man, and a man who tries to do his duty up to the 
handle, as you might term it, and I do not think that Maj. Mc- 
Laughlin 

Mr. Carter (interposing). It does not make any difference what 
you think of Maj. McLaughlin. That has nothing to do with this 
case. What I want to know is this : Do you desire to withdraw the 
statement that you made before Maj. McLaughlin came in, or do you 
want it to stand? 



ENKOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TKIBES. 421 

Mr, CoNERLY. I want to withdraw that part of it that would state 
that I got Mr. Harrison to introduce the bill, because I did not get 
him to do it. 

Mr. Carter. I did not ask you about withdrawing the statement 
you made to Maj. McLaughlin, I asked you if you wanted the state- 
ment that you put in the record saying, in effect, that you did not 
make this statement to Maj. McLaughlin, to stand or be withdrawn? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Let it stand in the record as I stated it at first. 

Mr. Carter. Then you declare the fact to be that you did not make 
this statement to Maj. McLaughlin? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I have no recollection of making it. 

Mr. Carter. Can you state positively that you did not make it? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I can not think that I made the statement at all in 
that way. 

Mr. Carter. Can you say positively that you did not make it? 

Mr. CoNERLY. It is possible that Maj. McLaughlin misunderstood 
me in that running conversation. 

Mr. Carter. Here is an employee or representative of the Interior 
Department who comes down here and presents what ought to be an 
unbiased report to Congress. If he presents a biased report and has 
misstated the facts, he has not performed his duty, and all the com- 
pliments that 3^ou can pay him before this committee or at any other 
place would not remove that stigma from him. If he has reported 
something in here that you did not say, he should not have done it, 
and if he has reported what you did say, you should not only not 
deny it, but jou should, as a good citizen, refrain from trying to dis- 
credit it. 

Mr. CoNERLY. I did not do that at all. 

Mr. Carter. You do not want to discredit what he said here at all ? 

Mr. CoxERLY. No, sir; of course not. 

Mr. Carter. I think that is about all I want to ask you. 

Mr. Balltkger. If you did make that representation as reported 
here it was not correct, was it ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I have just stated that I did not get Mr. Harrison 
to introduce the bill, but I may have been instrumental in it in an 
indirect way. 

Mr. Carter. What do you mean by saying you may liaA'e been in- 
strnmental in it in an indirect way? 

Mr. CoxERLY. I expressed the desire or the opinion to our attorney 
that he was the logical man to introduce the bill. 

Mr. Carter. What effect did that have on Mr. Harrison? 

Mr. CoxERT.Y. I do not Icnow. 

Mr. Carter. You told the attorney that you thought Mr. Harri- 
son was the logical man? 

Mr. CoxERLY. Yes, sir; I told Mr. Cantwell that. 

Mr. Carter. You do not know what Mr. Cantwell did? 

ISIr. CoxERLY. I do not know anything about Mr. Cantwell's talk 
with ISIr. Harrison. 

Mr. Carter. Do you know who drew that bill? 

Mr. CoxERLY. No, sir ; I do not know who drew the bill. 

Mr. Carter. Did you ever see it before it was introduced? 

]Mr. CoxERLY. I do not think I did; not before it was printed. 

Mr. Carter. Wlio showed it to you when you did see it ? 



422 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. CoNERLY. I think it was sent to me at Gulfport. I do not 
know Avho sent it to me. It may have been sent by Mr. Harrison, 
but I have no recollection of having seen that bill before it was sent 
to me at Gulfport. 

Mr. Carter. As I understand it, your statement is this: You do 
not dispute what Maj. McLaughlin has said and you do not attempt 
to discredit him ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I would not discredit him under any circumstances. 

Mr. Carter. And you say if you did say that to Maj. McLaughlin 
it was a mistake ? 

Mr. Co^'EI^Lr. Yes, sir; it was a mistake if I said that, but I 
qualified that conversation, you understand. A man pursuing a 
multiplicity of objects like this is liable to make an error. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Chairman, there has gone into the record an 
address or a part of an address delivered by Mr. Hurley before the 
conference at Lake Mohonk, N. Y., and in that address was a state- 
ment to this effect, that he was informed that there were 40,000 or 
60,000 claimants to Choctaw or Chickasaw citizenship who had em- 
ployed attorneys upon large contingent fees, and I think something 
ought to go into the record showing upon what information that 
statement was made. 

Mr. Carter. Let me ask you a question, Mr. Ballinger. How many 
Indian enrollment contracts have you ? 

Mr. Ballinger. At the present time I represent, including Missis- 
sippi Choctaws and resident Choctaws, probably 5,000 claimants. 

Mr. Carter. I think I remember quite distinctly that one of the 
first things I ever heard before a committee when I came to Congress 
was your statement that you represented some 40,000 people. 

Mr. Ballinger. No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. You made that statement before the House Committee 
on Indian Affairs — when we were considering the Removal of Re- 
strictions bill, and you stated that if they would only put that thing 
off 12 months you would be here with court judgments putting them 
on the roll. 

Mr. Ballinger. I am certain you are mistaken. My statement at 
that time was that we had applications that had been submitted to 
us for investigation representing approximately 13,000. Those were 
cases in which there had been applications sent to us and statements 
of the cases. In 1910 we went to the Dawes Commission, and on the 
records of the Government we discarded approximately all but 3.000 
of those cases, discovering that there was not sufficient merit in them 
to justify their prosecution. Since that time I have made no effort 
at all in behalf of any of those people whose cases we discarded, and 
I have so stated before committees of Congress. If you will secure 
the statement I submitted to the committee in 1910 you will find that 
it stated that we represented approximaely 13,000 claimants. I think 
that record is here in the office. 

Mr. Carter. How many cases do you represent now ? 

Mr. Ballinger. There are less than 3,000 resident Choctaws. Most 
of those cases have been briefed and are submitted in Senate Docu- 
ment No. 1139, Sixty-second Congress, third session. 

Mr. Carti':r. Let us see about that. Mr. Lee, as I understand, is 
your partner, and I have here what he says about it. Let us see how 
near 



EKEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 423 

Mr. Ballinger (interposing). He is not mj^ partner. 

Mr. Carter. I have not been able to get any definite information 
from anybody about whom they represent. They dispute what asso- 
ciates say about what they represent, and when you come down to 
the point, even the partners do not seem to agree. Here is what 
Albert J. Lee stated : 

Mr. Webster Ballinger and I represent some 13.000 persons who claim a 
right in the tribal property of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians in Okla- 
homa. Of the above number of persons represented by us, there are 3,738 
who are conclusively, as shown by the Government records, entitled to share 
in the distribution of the tribal property. 

He then says that in addition to the above cases you and he repre- 
sent 10,000 claimants whose records do not conclusively show that 
they are entitled to share in the distribution of the property, " but," 
he says, " if Congress permits proof to be made in these cases, I esti- 
mate that at least 3,000 of them will be good. Our fee in these cases 
is 40 per cent, and in the event of success in the 3,000 cases indicated, 
my individual fee would approximate $2,065,911. My proposed 
assignment includes all of these cases." According to this statement 
there are 14,938 claimants that your partner says you and he rep- 
resent. 

JNIr. Ballinger. You are submitting the statement made by Albert 
J. Lee that was furnished to certain parties in Texas, the object of 
which was to sell an interest in his contingent fees. I had no part 
whatever in that transaction and I never knew that such a statement 
had been prepared. When the matter came to my knowledge, I 
denounced it, both in letters to him and to_the parties to whom he 
made the assignment. It never came to my knowledge until six 
or eight months or longer after the transaction had been consum- 
mated. I never participated in ,it, directly or indirectly, nor had I 
any knowledge of it. 

Mr. Carter. I am not saying that you did. That is not the ques- 
tion I am asking you about. Whenever I try to get you gentlemen 
down to the facts on this matter, one of you says one thing and 
another something else. I am trying to get definite information as 
to whom you represent. You say that you represent about 5,000 
claimants, and your partner says that you represent 14,938. 

Mr. Ballinger. I ought not to be bound by the statement made by 
Albert J. Lee, who is not my partner. 

Mr. Carter. He was your partner when this statement was made. 

Mr. Ballinger. It was made by a man who was formerly my 
partner. 

Mr. Carter. He was your partner when the statement was made. 

Mr. Ballinger. He was not my partner when that statement was 
made. 

Mr. Carter. He was not your partner on October 17, 1912? 

Mr. Ballinger. I think not. 

Mr. Carter. I think you will find that he was, but don't you 
know? 

Mr. Ballinger. I think not. I think at that time our partnership 
had been dissolved, and while he still had an interest in these 
cases 

Mr. Carter (interposing). Plere is what he says: 

Mr. Webster Ballinger and I rei)reseut Konic 13,000 persons who claim a right 
In the tribal property of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians in Oklahoma. 



424 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Mr. Ballinger. IIow many did you say? 

Mr. Carter. Thirteen thousand. 

Mr. Ballinger. It is true that we originally did have contracts 
with approximately 13,000 persons. 

]\Ir. Carter. Then, according to the enumeration he gives, you 
represent 14,938. 

Mr. Ballinger. In 1910. we investigated the records and dis- 
carded 10,000 of them, and Mr. Lee knew it when he signed that 
statement. 

Mv. Carter. If you gentlemen do not want your motives im- 
punged, and if you do not want these statements made loosely, as 
you say Mr. Lee made them, without authority, then you ought to 
get rid of your partners and testify definitely yourselves. 

Mr. Ballinger. I have. 

Mr. Carter. And you ought to repudiate them. You ought not 
only to get rid of them but you should repudiate their statements. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Carter, I want this to be plain: Taking the 
estimated maximum amount of contracts that have ever been made, 
according to the most extreme representations that have ever been 
made, you can not find to exceed 25,000, and yet here is a statement 
which says that 50,000 

Mr. Carter (interposing). Seventeen thousand Choctaws. 

Mr. Ballinger. More than that. 

Mr. Carter. Nineteen thousand enrolled Choctaws and about 6,000 
Chickasaws. That is 25,000. 

JNIr. Ballinger. And 15,000 freedmen. 

Mr. Carter. "When you speak about 25.000 as enrolled I can under- 
stand very easily that that might be confused with a larger number. 

Mr. Ballinger. I merely wanted the record to ajopear clear. 

Mr. Carter. You have no right to put in the record only 25,000, 
because nobody knows. I have tried to find out. Perhaps you can 
tell how many you and your partner have. Mr. Conerly says one 
thing, Mr. Cant well says another thing, and perhaps Mr. Crews 
would say another thing. When a definite statement can not be pro- 
cured I do not ^ce hoAV you can find fault with a man who uses the 
largest number to fit his side of the case. 

Mr. Hurley. I stated at the last Mohonk conference that from the 
statements made by attorneys representing claimants before the dif- 
ferent committees of Congress, that I judged that not less than 50.000 
contracts had been made with attorneys by persons who were urging 
their claims for enrollment. That statement is based more on Mr. 
Ballinger's own figures than those of any other one man. Mr. Bal- 
linger has represented that himself and his partner represent many 
difi'erent classes of claimants for citizenship, and of all the other at- 
torneys who claim to represent thousands of applicants, I think it 
was his exorbitant figures more than aii}^ one man's, that led me to 
make that statement. His own claims were the foundation of the 
statement. 

Mr. Ballinger. Put in the record any statement I have previously 
made to committees of Congress. 

Mr. Hurley. The one Mr. Carter refers to. 

Mr. Ballinger. That is not fair. Mr. Hurley's statement is based 
upon representations made by me. The chairman has referred to a 
statement made by Mr. Lee. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 425 

Mr. Carter. I will put that in the record. I will ask Mr. Kichard- 
son how many contracts he has. 

Mr. Richardson. We represent between 1,000 and 1,200 Indians. 
They are all full-bloods. We do not represent any mixed bloods. 

Mr. Carter. You represent the McKennon roll, the identified? 

Mr. EicHARDSON. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Arnold, how many Indians do you represent? 

Mr. Arnold. I am associated with Mr. Richardson. 

Mr. Sullivan. We all represent from 1,000 to 1,200. 

Mr. Ballinger. There is an absolute duplication of clients. I was 
about to make that statement. 

Mr. Hurley. You say 25,000 applicants have made contracts and 
there is an absolute duplication — 26,000 and 25,000 make 50,000. 

Mr. Carter. We find, according to the statement", 27,996. 

Mr. Ballinger. You find representation here with reference to 
these Mississippi Chcctaws of Crews & Cantwell aggregating 10,000 
or 11,000 ; a representation here by Mr. Richardson, Mr. Arnold, and 
others of 1,000 to 1,200, that are on the McKinnon roll — just about 
1,100 ; and I represent, and those connected with me, approximately 
between 5,000 and 6,000. 

Mr. Carter. Are those Mississippi Choctaws? 

Mr. Ballinger. There are about 3,000 who are Mississippi Choc- 
taws. There is an absolute duplication. 

Mr. Carter. Crews & Cantwell seem to represent 9,558. 

Mr. Ballinger. I spoke of them. The total numbers of all the 
contracts, including the duplications, do not exceed 15,000. 

Mr. Carter. There appears to be some 28,000 enumerated right 
before me. As I just explained, your partner says that you and he 
together represent 14,938; Crews & Cantwell represent, including 
Mississippi Choctaws and all others, 11,858; and Mr. Richardson, 
Mr. Arnold, and Mr. Sullivan represent 1,200. That is 27,996. 

Mr. Sullivan. One thousand two hundred in all. 

Mr. Ballinger. As I have tried to make plain, my former partner, 
Albert J. Lee, has made a statement that Ave had contracts with some 
14,000 or more persons. 

Mr. Carter. Fourteen thousand nine hundred and thirty-eight. 

Mr. Ballinger. 1 stated to you that in 1910 we investigated those 
cases and discarded all of those cdses but about 3,000. 

Mr. Carter. This letter of his was written in 1912, and how do 
you reconcile any such statements? 

Mr. Ballinger. I say that Lee's whole statement is an absolute 
misrepresentation of the facts. 

Mr. Carter, How much money did he get? 

Mr. Ballinger. I can not speak authoritatively, because I had no 
connection, directly or indirectl}^, with the transaction. 

Mr. Carter. Did he furnish you with any money? 

Mr. Ballinger. Absolutely not a dollar. I never knew of the 
transaction until six or eight months after it occurred, when I de- 
nounced it in letters to both Albert J. Lee and the parties from whom 
he obtained the funds. 

Mr. Carter. l*ut those letters in the record. 

Mr. Ballinger. I shall do so when the time comes. I know nothing 
about those cases. That statement is an absolute misrepresentation of 
the facts. 



426 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mv. Carter. I do not object to attorneys. People have to have 
attorneys; they must have attorne3^s to present claims of any kind. 
I do not, however, agree with some gentlemen that it is ethical for 
the attorneys to hire agents to go out and solicit contracts. You 
know, Mr. Ballinger, as well as I know, that the statement of your 
partner was made at the time he was a partner of 3^ours? 

Mr. Ballinger. Xo, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Then, you ought to do one of two things. You ought 
to either not expect the committee to take your statement over his 
and discredit his statement completely, unless you can show the com- 
mittee by records that you have dissolved with him and that you 
repudiated him at the time. 

Mr. Ballinger. There is no act of mine that is not subject to in- 
vestigation. Every contract taken of which I have any knowledge 
is in my office. Every letter ever wa-itten with my knowledge is in 
my office. My records are subject to investigation by any member of 
this committee or any person designated by this committee now or at 
any future time. 

Mr. Carter. Bring them up here and put them on the table. 

Mr. Ballinger. It would make quite a large bundle of documents. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Conerly, do you speak the Choctaw lan- 
guage? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. 

Mr. Richardson. In soliciting contracts, were your contracts prin- 
cipally secured by letters written through the mails or by personal in- 
terviews with the claimants? 

Mr. Conerly. Both. Some called on me and I took their contracts 
personally. I had correspondence with a great many. A good deal 
of the work was done by correspondence. They wrote me for that 
purpose and gave me their records. 

Mr. Richardson. Did you go to them or did they come to you? 

Mr. Conerly. I never traveled about the State, only when I was 
notified that there would be a group of people to see me, and that 
I could probably take 25 or 30 at a time. 

Mr. Richardson. In what part of the State do you live? 

Mr. Conerly. Gulfport, Harrison County, on the Mississippi 
Sound. I travel A-ery little. 

Mr. RiciiAiJDSON. Did you ever go into Newton County? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. 

Mr. Richardson. Did you ever go into Neshoba County? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. 

Mr. Richardson. Did you ever go into Leake County? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. 

Mr. Richardson. Did you ever go into Scott County? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. 

Mr. Richardson. Did you ever go into Kempler County? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. I made one trip to Jasper County for a 
few days, and I wrote up a man named Murphy and his wife, who 
claimed to be full bloods. I forget his given name. He told me that 
his father and mother had been put on the rolls in Oklahoma, and 
that his wife's father and mother had been put on the rolls, and that 
they had died lliere. and that he had a suit pending to recover the 
property. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 427 

Mr. Richardson. Did you write up a contract with him as a Mis- 
sissippi Choctaw ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. I think I could find that contract. 1 
think it is among the papers that I brought up. 

Mr. KicHARDSON. In Avhat business was he engaged ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I think he was a farmer. 

Mr. Richardson. Did he speak English? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Richardson. Do you know where he attended school ? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir; I did not make any inquiries? 

Mr. Richardson. Did he have a family ? 

Mr. Conerly. He had a wife. I did not see any children. He 
came to see me where I was. He told me those things. He gave 
me the name of his father. He said that his father and mother both 
died in Oklahoma, and also the mother and father of his wife; that 
they had been taken over there by the Dawes Commission and put 
on the roll and given their allotments. 

Mr. Richardson. Did he tell you that his father's name was 
Murphy ? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Richardson. He was carried over by the Dawes Commission ? 

Mr. Conerly. That is my opinion; yes, sir. There vrere a lot of 
Mississippi Indians taken over there about that time, taken over 
from Meridian in 1901. 

Mr. Richardson. How many contracts did you take for full- 
blooded Mississippi Choctaws, if any? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not remember. I think very few full bloods. 
J might mention a woman, a Mrs. Andre, of Mobile County, Ala. 
I took her contract. She claimed that she had made application 
through the Dawes Commission and that she was rejected. Mrs. 
Andre is of record in the Interior Department. Whether she is a 
full blood or not I can not say. She looks like it. I do not believe 
there are any full-blooded Choctaws anywhere. 

Mr. Richardson. Did you ever see any of the Choctaws who could 
not speak English? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. I have never seen one yet but who could 
speak English. 

Mr. Richardson. The chairman of the committee in his question 
asked you whether, in your judgment, it was not probable that Mr. 
Powell first went to the persons whom he thought had the best 
claims, and you said you thought that was so. I would like to ask 
you whether or not, from your knowledge of Mr. Powell and his 
action in this matter, it is not more probable that he first went to 
the persons who would give him the $2.50 per head? 

Mr. Conerly. Hoav is that question? 

Mr. Richardson. Which class of people was Powell the most 
solicitous of obtaining contracts from? 

Mr. Conerly. I do not think Mr. Powell made any distinction 
about that — about any class of people. 

Mr. Richardson. So long as they paid $2.50? 

Mr. Conerly. You do not understand me. So long as they could 
prove their right. I was very careful about that. 

Mr. Richardson. Are any full bloods members of this Society 
of Mississippi Choctaws which you say are organized in Gulf port? 



428 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Mr. CoNERLY, Our constitution provides that only persons of In- 
dian and Caucasian blood can be members of the society. Ony one 
tainted with negro blood is excluded from the society by the consti- 
tution. 

Mr. RiciTARDSON. I asked you whether you had any members who 
were full bloods? 

Mr. CoNERLY. "We have a woman who was on our executive com- 
mittee who lives in New Orleans and who claims that she is seven- 
eighths Indian. She is Mrs. Elizabeth Norwood and a member of 
the executive committee. She claims that one of her grandmothers 
was a Jewess. 

Mr. Carter. How much Indian? 

Mr. CoNERLY- She claims seven-eighths. In other words, she 
claims that she is one-eighth Jewish blood. 

Mr. Richardson. Her grandmother was a Jewess? 

Mr. CoNERLY. One of her grand ancestors, I do not remember 
which one. I have Mrs. Norwood's contract. No, I have not ; Judge 
Crews has that in St. Louis. She is a member of our society and she 
is a member of the executive committee. She lives in New Orleans. 
She is a very fine woman. 

Mr. Richardson. Her mother or father was a full-blooded 
Choctaw? 

Mr. CoNERLY. She claims to be a descendant of an Indian woman 
named Nancy, who, from the information I could get, was formerly 
the wife of a man named Lawrenceson. One of the Lawrencesons, I 
think, made application under the Dawes Commission, and Nancy, 
according to my information, married a man named Williamson. 

Mr. Richardson. Was he a full blood? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I think so ; yes, sir. Either one of her ancestors was 
a Jewess, I do not remember which ancestor it was. I think one of 
her grandmothers. 

Mr. Richardson. What is her personal appearance? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Mrs. Norwood's? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. CoNERLY. My opinion is that if Mrs. Norwood is not an Indian 
there are no Indians. 

Mr. Richardson. Is this woman the only one you know of in your 
society who is a full blood or claims to be a full blood? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Mrs. Norwood claims to be a full blood. Most of 
our society members are descendants of white blood, but they range 
down to quarters. We have plenty that are quarter. When you come 
to the degree of blood, it is very difficult. We have a lot of people 
in our society who, there is no question, have Indian blood, but the 
degree of blood is hard to determine on account of the assimilation, 
marriage, and intermarriage and crossing back again. I hold that 
there is no rule by Avhich you can determine a full-blooded Choctaw. 
I can not determine it by any ethnological study I have undertaken 
and from the simple fact that the Choctaws have assimilated with 
the white people so long a. time. Plistory shows that there are a 
number of white men who have Indian families and white women 
who have Indian husbands. 

Mr. Richardson. AYhen you visited Jasper Count}^, did you ascer- 
tain the information that there were settlements of full bloods back 
in the country ? 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 429 

Mr. CoNEELY. I stayed in Jasper County about two or three days. 
I learned that there were many more there, but they did not come 
to see me and I did not hunt them up. I understood that Powell had 
been through there. I supposed they had put in their contracts with 
Powell. This man Murphy and his wife are the only people I re- 
member. There were some negro Indians there, but I never filed 
their contracts. 

Mr. Richardson. Did any full bloods ever visit the session of this 
council which was held at Gulf port ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Yes, sir. We have a man down there — I do not 
know whether he is a member of the society or not — he was from 
Alabama originally, his name is Gordia. He claims to be a full 
blood. 

Mr. Richardson. Is he educated or uneducated? 

Mr. CoNERLY. He has an ordinary education. He told me that 
he was from Alabama. I took a number of contracts from Mobile 
County. 

Mr. Richardson. You were present at the conclusion of the hear- 
ing yesterday when I asked Mr. Cantwell if he would file with this 
committee a list of the names of any persons with whom he had con- 
tracts who were full-blooded Indians? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Cantwell, as I understand, has returned to 
St. Louis or Pittsburgh, and you are here at his request? Did he 
authorize you to file the list of full bloods with whom he might have 
contracts or give you any instructions with regard to that ? 

Mr. Conerly. No, sir. He only requested me to come before the 
committee to make a certain statement. I had no idea that I would 
be drawn into questions as I have been. 

Mr. Carter. What statement was that ? 

Mr. Conerly. In reference to the 4,200. I explained that there 
were actually 3,800 contracts instead of 4,200, 400 being rejected, it 
seems, by the Court of Claims and thrown out that were inadvert- 
ently connected or added with the 3,800. That is the correction. 

Mr. Richardson. Has this Mrs. Andre, the person with whom you 
are acquainted, a contract with Crews? 

Mr. Conerly. Yes, sir. I think I took her contract for Cantwell & 
Crews or Thomas B. Crews, I do not know which. 

Mr. Richardson. Recently? 

Mr. Conerly. Last year, t think. Either last year or probably the 
early part of 1912; I can not say exactly. Of course, I have her 
record at home. 

Mr. Richardson. As I understand you, you can recall three persons 
who claim to be full bloods, the lady who lives in New Orleans, the 
man named Murphy, and the man named Gordia, who have con- 
tracts with Crews & Cantwell, and whose contracts might possibly 
be assigned to this Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co., of Houston. 
Those are the only three persons you recall? 

Mr. Conerly. I can not tell you. I do not know what will be done. 
I have turned them over to my lawyer. 

Mr. Carter. Have you only taken contracts from three full bloods? 

Mr. Conerly. I can not say. I took a few out in INIobile County, 
but, as I tell you, it is impossible to determine what a full blood is. 



430 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TllIBES. 

They claim to be full bloods and look like them. If you look into 
the records at the department you will find Mrs. Andre. She re- 
ceived a notice that her claim had been rejected. Mrs. Andre's chil- 
dren are now quarter, because Mrs. Andre married a Frenchman. 
Her husband was a white man. 

Mr. RiCHAKDSON. She is not a full blood? 

Mr. CoNERLT. Seven-eighths. 

Mr. Richardson. Mrs. Andre? 

Mr. CoNERLT. Yes, sir. I do not know whether she is a full blood 
or not. 

Mr. R.ICITARDSON. How would her children be quarter if she was a 
full blood? 

Mr. CoNERLY. Mrs. Andre was the daughter of a Frenchman and 
her mother was a full blood. 

Mr. Richardson. She was not entitled to be enrolled by the Dawes 
Commission because she was a mixed blood, unless she proved her 
descent ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. That may be ; I do not know what the ruling of the 
commission was on the question of blood. 

Mr. Richardson. That leaves two persons whom you recall who 
claim to be full bloods whom you have taken contracts with ? 

Mr. CoNERLY. There is another one by the name of Laurendine, 
who is a cousin of Mrs. Andre. He looks like a full-blood Indian, 
but he is not. 

Mr. Carter. Did you know whether either of these people you 
took contracts with were full bloods? 

Mr. CoNERLY. No, sir. I do not know at full blood when I see 
him, and I do not think anybody can determine that question. 

Mr. Carter. Do you know whether they were really Choctaw 
Indians or not? 

Mr. CoNERLY. I got that information from them. 

Mr. Carter. They claimed to be? 

Mr. CoNEREY. Yes, sir ; and from the best information I have been 
able to get, they are. 

Mr. Richardson. You did not take a single contract from a person 
who spoke Choctaw and could not speak English ? 

Mr. CoxERLY. No, sir; not that T know of. T think there are very 
few persons that might be considered full bloods. I took probably 
100 people in the colony in Jackson County, Miss., with descend- 
ants claiming to show their descent on down from ancestors of 
1830. I Avill make this remark about that: Many of them were the 
direct descendants of Capt. James King, who was a son of Mushula- 
tubbee, the chief who presided over that disti'ict at the time of 1S30. 
There are a number of great-grandchildren of John King, a son of 
his named TTiram, and a daughter named Rebecca, and some children 
from a son of this same chief in Arkansas. Those Indians in Jack- 
son County, they are mixed bloods, some quarters; whether they are 
full bloods, I can not say. I do not think there are any full bloods 
among that colony, but they look like it. They have intermarried 
with the white people. 



Part Seven 



r 



MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAW INDIANS 



EXTRACT 
FROM THE HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SIXTY-THIRD CONGRESS 
SECOND SESSION 

ON 

H. R. 3389, 3390, 6537, 7926, 7974, 8007, 
10066, 10140, and 12586 

BILLS ON THE SUBJECT OF ENROLLMENT 
IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES 

BEING THE 

ARGUMENT OF P. J. HURLEY AGAINST THE 

ENROLLMENT OF THE SO-CALLED 

MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAWS 



Printed for the use of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs 



WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OmOE 

1916 



EXTRACTS FROM THE HEARINGS BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE 
OF THE COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, HOUSE OF REP- 
RESENTATIVES, ON THE SUBJECT OF ENROLLMENT OF MIS- 
SISSIPPI CHOCTAWS. 



TUESDAY, AUGUST 11, 1914. 

Subcommittee on Indian Affairs, 

House of Representatives. 

The committee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m. pursuant to the call of the 
chairman. 



STATEMENT OF P. J. HURLEY, ATTORNEY FOR CHOCTAW 

NATION. 

Mr. HtiRLEY. Mr. Chairman, before beginning my remarks I 
should like to have inserted in the record at this point the treaty 
between the Choctaw Nation and the United States of September 27, 
1830, commonly known as the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek. 

Mr. Post. Is that not already in the record? 

Mr. Hurley. No, sir; it is not. The fourteenth article has been 
put in several times, but I desire that the entire treaty go in the rec- 
ord, because many claimants remained in Mississippi who were not 
fourteenth-article claimants. 

Mr. Carter. How many pages does it cover, Mr. Hurley? 

Mr. Hurley. Five printed pages. 

Mr. Carter. Without objection, it is so ordered. 

(The treaty is as follows:) 

Treaty With the Choctaws, 1830. 

a treaty of perpetual friendship, cession, and limits entered into by john 
h. eaton and john coffee. for and in behalf of the fiom^rnment of the 
unitkd states and the mingoes. chiefs, captains, and wakriors of the 
choctaw nation, begun and held at dancing rabbit creek on the 15th of 
september, in the year is^o. 

Where:is the General Assembly of tbe State of Mississippi has extended the 
laws of Riiid Slate to persons and property within the chartered limits of the 
same, and the I'lesident of the United States has said that he can not protect 
the Choctaw i)eople from the operation of these laws; now, therefore, that the 
Choctaw i)eop]e may live nnder their own laws; m peace with the United States 



4 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

and the S(a(o of Mississipjii they have determined to sell their lands east of the 
Mississippi and have accordingly agreed to the following articles of treaty:^ 

Article I. Perpetual peace and friendship is pledged and agreed npon by 
and between the United States and the Mingoes. chiefs, and warriors of the 
Choctaw Nation of red people; and that this may be considered the treaty ex- 
isting between the parties, all other treaties heretofore existing and inconsistent 
with the provisions of this are hereby declared null and void. 

Artjcle II. The United States, nnder a gi-ant especially to be made by the 
President of the United States, shall canse to be conveyed to the Choctaw Na- 
tion a tract of conntry west of the Mississippi River in fee simple to them and 
their descendants, to innre to them while they shall exist as a nation and live 
on it, beginning near Fort Smith where the Arkansas bonndary crosses the 
Arkansas River, running thence to the source of the Canadian fork, if in the 
limits of the United States, or to those limits; thence due south to Red River 
and down Red River to the west boundary of the Territory of Arkansas; 
thence nordi along that line to the beginning. The boundary of the same to be 
agreeably to the treaty made and concluded at Washington City in the year 
1S25. The grant to be executed so soon as the present treaty shall be ratified. 

Article IIL In consideration of the provisions contained in the several 
articles of this treaty, the Choctaw Nation of Indians consent and hereby cede 
to the I'nited States the entire country they own and possess east of the Mis- 
sissippi River; and they agree to move beyond the Mississippi River early as 
practicable and will so arrange their removal that as many as possible of their 
people, not exceeding one-half of the whole number, shall depart during the 
falls of 1831 and 1832, the residue to follow during the succeeding fall of 1833. 
A better opportunity in this manner will be afforded the Government to extend 
to them facilities and comforts which it is desirable should be extended in con- 
veying them to their new homes. 

Article IV. The Government and people of the United States are hereby 
obliged to secure to the said Choctaw Nation of red people the jurisdiction and 
government of all persons and property that may be within their limits west, so 
that no territory or State shall ever have a right to pass laws ofr the govern- 
ment of the Choctaw Nation of red people and their descendants; and that no 
part of the land granted them shall ever l)e embraced in any Territory or State; 
but the United States shall forever secure said Choctaw Nation from and 
against all laws except such as from time to time may be enacted in their 
own national councils, not inconsistent with the Constitution, treaties, and laws 
of the United States, and except such as may and which have been enacted by 
Congress to the extent that Congress under the Constitution are required to 
exercise a legislation over Indian affairs. But the Choctaws, should this treaty 
be ratified, express a wish that Congress may grant to the Choctaws the right 
of punishing by their own laws any white man who shall come into their 
nation and infringe any of their national regulations. 

Article V. The United States are obliged to protect the Choctaws from do- 
mestic strife and from foreign enemies on the same principles that the citizens 
of the United States are protected, so that whatever would be a legal demand 
upon the United States for defense or for wrongs committed by an enemy on a 
citizen of the United States shall be equally binding in favor of the Choctaws, 
and in all cases where the Choctaws shall be called upon by a legally authorized 
ofhcer of the United States to fight an enemy such Choctaw shall receive the 
pay and other emoluments which citizens of the United States receive in stich 
cases: Provided, No war shall be undertaken or prosecuted by said Choctaw 
Nation but by declaration made in full council and to be approved by th.? 
United States unless it be in self-defense against an open rebellion or against 
an enemy marching into their country, in which cases they shall defend until 
the United States are advised thereof. , 

Article VI. Should a Choctaw or any party of Choctaws commit acts of vio- 
lence upon the person or property of a citizen of the TTnited States or join any 
war party against any neighboring tribe of Indians without the authority in the 
preceding article, and except to oppose an actual or threatened invasion or 
rebellion, such person so offending shall be delivered up to an officer of the 
United States, if in the power of the Choctaw Nation, that such offender may 
be punished as may be provided in such cases by the laws of the United States; 
but if such offender is not within the control of the Choctaw Nation, then said 



1 This paragraph was not ratified. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 5 

Choctaw Nation shall not be held responsible for the injury done by said 
offender. 

Article VII. All acts of violence committed upon persons and property of the 
people of the Choctaw Nation, either by citizens of the United States or neigh- 
boring tribes of red people, shall be referred to some authorized agent, by him 
to be referred to the President of the United States, who shall examine into 
such cases and see that every possible degree of justice is done to said Indian 
party of the Choctaw Nation. 

Article VIII. Offenders against the laws of the United States or any indi- 
vidual State shall be apprehended and delivered to any duly authorized person 
where such offender may be found the the Choctaw country, having fled from 
any part of the United States, but in all such cases application must be made 
to the agent or chiefs, and the expense of his apprehension and delivery pro- 
vided for and paid by the United States. 

Article IX. Any citizen of the United States who may be ordered from the 
nation by the agent and constituted authorities of the nation and refusing to 
obey or return into the nation without the consent of the aforesaid persons shall 
be subject to such pains and penalties as may be provided by the laws of the 
United States in such cases. Citizens of the United States traveling peaceably 
under the authority of the laws of the United States shall be under the care and 
protection of the nation. 

Article X. No person shall expose goods or other articles for sale as a trader 
without a written permit from the constituted authorities of the nation or 
authority of the laws of the Congress of the United States under penalty of 
forfeiting the articles, and the constituted authorities of the nation shall grant 
no license except to such persons as reside in the nation and are answerable to 
the laws of the nation. The United States shall be particularly obliged to 
assist to prevent ardent spirits from being introduced into the nation. 

Article XL Navigable streams shall be free to the Choctaws, who shall pay 
no higher toll or duty than citizens of the United States. It is agreed further 
that the United States shall establish one or more post offices in said nation, 
and may establish such military post roads and posts as they may consider 
necessary. 

Article XII. All intruders shall be removed from the Choctaw Nation and 
kept without it. Private property to be always respected, and on no occasion 
taken for public purposes without just comiiensation being made therefor to the 
rightful owner. If an Indian unlawfully take or steal any property from a 
white man a citizen of the United States, the offender shall be punished; and 
if a white man unlawfully take or steal anything from an Indian, the property 
shall be restored and the offender punished. It is further agreed that when a 
Choctaw shall be given up to be tried for any offense against the laws of the 
United States, if unable to enii»]oy counsel to defend him the United States 
will do it. that his trial may be fair and impartial. 

Article XIII. It is consented that a qualified agent shall be appointed for the 
Choctaws every four years, unless sooner removed by the President: and he 
shall be removed on petition of the constituted authorities of the nation, the 
President being satisfied there is sutticient cause shown. The agent shall fix 
his residence convenient to the great body of the people, and in the selection of 
an agent immediately after the ratification of this treaty the wishes of the 
(yhoctaw Nation on this subject shall be entitled to great respect. 

Article XIV. Each Choctaw head of a family being desirous to remain and 
become a citizen of the States shall be i)erniitte<l to do so by signifying his 
intention to the agent within six months from the ratification of this treaty, 
and he or she sh;ill thereui)on be entitled to a reservation of 1 section of 640 
acres of land, to be hounded by section lines of survey; in like manner shall 
be entitled to one-half that quantity for each unmarried child which is living 
with him over 10 years of age and a quarter section to such child as may be 
under 10 years of age, to adjoin the location of the parent. If they reside on 
said lands intending to become citizens of the States for five years after the 
ratification of this treaty, in such case a grant in fee simple shall issue; said 
reservation shall include the present improvement of the head of the family 
or a portion of it. Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the 
privilege of a Choctaw citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled 
to any portion of the Choctaw annuity. 

Article XV. To each of the chiefs in the Choctaw Nation — to wit. Green- 
wood Laflore. Nutackachie, and Mushulatubbe — there is granted a reservation 



6 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

of four sections of land, two of which shall include and adjoin their present 
improvement and the other two located where they please, but on unoccupied, 
unimproved lands; such sections shall be bounded by section lines, and, with 
the consent of the President, they may sell the same. Also to the three prin- 
cipal chiefs and to their successors in office there shall be paid $250 annually 
while they shall continue in their respective offices, except to Mushulatubbe, 
who. as he has an annuity of $150 under a former treaty, shall receive only 
the additional sum of $100 while he shall continue in office as chief; and If 
in addition to this the nation shall think proper to elect an additional principal 
chief of the whole to superintend and .sovern upon republican principles, he 
shall receive annually for his services $500, which allowance to the chiefs and 
their successors in office shall continue for 20 years. At any time when in 
military service and while in service by authority of the United States the 
district chiefs, under and by selection of the President, shall be entitled to the 
pay of majors; the other chief under the same circumstances shall have the 
pay of lieutenant colonel. The speakers of the three districts shall receive 
$25 a year for four years each, and the three secretaries, one to each of the 
chiefs. $50 each for four years. Each captain of the nation, the number not 
to exceed 99, 33 from each district, shall be furnished upon '-emoving to the 
West with each a good suit of clothes and a broadswoi'd &_ an outfit, and 
for four years, commencing with the first of their removal, shall each receive 
$50 a year for the trouble of keeping their people at order in settling, and 
whenever they shall be in military service by authority of the United States 
shall receive the pay of a captain. 

Article XVI. In wagons and with steamboats, as may be found necessary, 
the United States agree to remove the Indians to their new homes at their 
expense and under the care of discreet and careful persons, who will be kind 
and brotherly to them. They agree to furnish them with ample corn and beef 
or pork for themselves and families for 12 months after reaching their new 
homes. 

It is agreed further that the United States will take all their cattle at the 
valuation of some discreet person to be appointed by the President, and the 
same shall be paid for in money after their arrival at their new homes; or 
other cattle, such as may be desired, shall be furnished them, notice being 
i-Tiven through their agent of their wishes upon this subject before their removal 
that time to supply the demand may be afforded. 

Article XVII. The several annuities and sums secured under former treaties 
to the Choctaw Nation and people shall continue as though this treaty had 
never been made. 

And it is further agreed that the United States in addition will pay the 
sum of $20,000 for 20 years, commencing after their removal to the West, of 
which, in the first year after their removal, $10,000 shall be divided and 
arranged to such as may not receive reservations under this treaty. 

Article XVIII. The United States shall cause the lands hereby ceded to 
be surveyed and surveyors may enter the Choctaw country for that purpose, 
conducting themselves properly and disturbing or interrupting none of the 
Choctaw people. But no person is to be permitted to settle within the nation 
or the lands to be sold before the Choctaws shall remove. And for the pay- 
ment of the several amounts secured in this treaty the lands hereby ceded 
are to remain a fund pledged to that purpose until the debt shall be provided 
for and arranged. And. further, it is agreed that in the construction of this 
treaty wherever well-founded doubt shall arise it shall be construed most 
favorably to the Choctaws. 

Article XIX. The following reservations of land are hereby admitted: To 
Col. David Fulsom four sections, of which two shall include his present Im- 
provement and two may be located elsewhere on unoccupied, unimproved land. 

To I. Garland. Col. 'Robert Cole, Tuppanahomer, John Pytchlynn, Charles 
Juzan, Johokebetubbe, Eaychahobia. Ofohoma, two sections, each to include 
their improvements and to be bounded by sectional lines, and the same may 
be disposed of and sold with the consent of the President. And that others, 
not provided for. may be provided for, there shall be reserve as follows : 

First, one section to each head of a family not exceeding 40 in number who 
during the present year may have had in actual cultivation, with a dwelling 
house thereon, 50 acres or more. 

Second, three quarter sections after the manner aforesaid to each head of a 
family not exceeding 450, as shall have cultivated 30 acres and less than 50, to 
be bounded by quarter sections of survey and to be contiguous and adjoining. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 7 

Third, one half section as aforesaid to those who shall have cultivated from 
20 to 30 acres, the number not to exceed 400. 

Fourth, a quarter section as aforesaid to such as shall have cultivated from 
12 to 20 acres, the number not to exceed 350, and one-half of that quantity to 
such as shall have cultivated from 2 to 12 acres, the number also not to exceed 
850 persons. Each of said class of cases shall be subject to the limitations con- 
tained in the first class and shall be so located as to include that part of the 
Improvement which contains the dwelling house. If a greater number shall be 
found to be entitled to reservations under the several classes of this article 
than is stipulated for under the limitation prescribed, then and in that case 
the chiefs separately or together shall determine the persons who shall be 
excluded in the respective districts. 

Fifth, any captain, the number not exceeding 90 persons, who, under the 
provisions of this article shall receive less than a section he shall be entitled 
to an additional quality of half a section adjoining his other reservation 
The several reservations secured under this article may be sold with the con- 
sent of the President of the United States, but should any prefer it, or omit 
to take a reservation for the quantity he may be entitled to. the United States 
will, on his removing, pay 50 cents an acre after reaching their new homes, 
provided that before the 1st of January next they shall adduce to the agent, 
or some other authorized person to be appointed, proof of his claim and the 
quantity of it. 

Sixth, likewise children of the Choctaw Nation residing in the nation who 
have neither father nor mother, a list of which with satisfactory proof of 
parentage and orphanage being filed with agent in six months to be forwarded 
to the War Department, shall be entitled to a quarter section of land, to be 
located under the direction of the President, and with his consent tlie same may 
be sold and the proceeds applied to some beneficial pui'pose for the benefit of 
said orphans. 

Article XX. The United States agree and stipulate as follows: That for 
the benefit and advantage of the Choctaw people and to improve their con- 
dition there shall be educated under the direction of the President and at the 
expense of the United States 40 Choctaw youths for 20 years. This number 
shall be kept at school and as they finish their education others to supply their 
places shall be received for the period stated. The United States agree also 
to erect a council house for the nation at some convenient central point after 
their people shall be settled, and a house for each chief, also a church for each 
of the three districts, to be used also as schoolhouses until the nation may 
conclude to build others; and for these purposes $10,000 shall be appropriated, 
also $50,000. viz, $2,500 annually shall be given for the support of three teachers 
of schools for 20 years. Likewise there shall be furnished to the nation 3 
blacksmiths, one for each district for IG years, and a qualifie<l millwright for 
5 years: also there shall be furnished the following articles: 2.100 blankets; 
to each warrior who emigrates a rifle, molds, wipers, and ammunition. One 
thousand axes, jtloughs, hoes, wheels, and cards each, and 400 looms. There 
shall also be furnished 1 ton of iron and 200 weight of steel annually to each 
district for 16 years. 

.iRTicLE XXI. A few Choctaw warriors yet survive who marched and fought 
in the Army with Gen. Wayne, the whole number not to exceed 20. 

These, it is agreed, shall hereafter, while they live, receive $25 a year, a list 
of them to be as early as practicable and within six months made out and 
[iresenttHl to the agent, to be forwarded to the War Department. 

Article XXII. The chiefs of the Choctaws who have suggested that their 
people are in a state of rai)id advancement in education and refinement, and 
have expressed a solicitude that they might have a delegate on the floor of the 
House of Representatives extended to them. The commissioners do not feel that 
they can under a treaty stipulation accede to this request, but at their desire 
present it in the treaty that Congress may consider of ;ind decide the application. 

Mr. HuKLEY. The claim of the so-called Mississippi Choctaws for 
eni-ollment as citizens of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations in 
Oklahoma has been considered before this committee at great length. 
Many conflicting statements have been made as to the alleged rights 
of these persons. 



8 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Before attempting to answer any of the arguments that have been 
made I will submit to the committee a brief outline, or rather a syn- 
opsis of the Mississippi Choctaw claim and the laws that have been 
passed, and the decisions that have been rendered affecting the claim. 
It is admitted by the proponents of the bill that is under your con- 
sideration that no person claiming to be of Choctaw blood liow resid- 
ing in Mississippi has any right to enrollment in the Choctaw Nation 
unless he or she be able to prove that right under the fourteenth arti- 
cle of the treaty of September 27, 1830, commonly known as the 
treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek (7 Stat. L., 335). 

By the fourteenth article of this treaty certain Choctaws reserved 
for themselves the rights of becoming citizens of the State of Mis- 
sissippi without relinquishing the right to thereafter remove to, and 
become citizens of the Choctaw Nation in Indian Territory. In the 
case of The Choctaw Nation v. United States (119 IJ. S., 1), the 
Supreme Court found that the great majority of the Choctaws re- 
moved to Indian Territory in 1831 to 1833, but that there were re- 
maining in Mississippi in 1838 about 5,000 Choctaws. All of these 
5,000 Indians who remained in Mississippi were not fourteenth arti- 
cle claimants. Some of them claimed under the nineteenth and other 
articles of the treaty. 

The number of fourteenth article claimants who signified their 
intention to remain in Mississippi was finally determined by Murry, 
Pray & Vroom under the act of Congress approved August 23, 1842 
(5 Stat., 513). Murry & Vroom ascertained that 1,155 heads of 
families had signified their intention to remain in Mississippi and 
become citizens. These heads of families and the members of their 
families amounted to 3,885 persons. One hundred and forty-three 
heads of families received patents for the members of their families — • 
amounting in all to about 276 persons. The persons therefore, who 
signified or attempted to signify their intention to remain in Missis- 
sippi and become citizens of that State, and reserve their rights 
under the fourteenth article of the treaty of Dancng Rabbit Creek, 
amounted in all to 4,161 persons. (See H. R. Doc. No. 898, 61st Cong., 
2d sess.) 

The muster rolls of emigrating Choctaws on file in the office of the 
Commissioner of Indian Affairs shows that more than 3,400 of these 
fourteenth article Choctaws removed to Indian Territory prior to 
the " script-payment," which was commenced in 1855. The script and 
money which was paid these emigrating Choctaws was in lieu of the 
land Avliich they relinquished in Mississippi, and to which they were 
entitled under the provisions of the fourteenth article of the treaty 
of Dancing Rabbit Creek. Many more of these fourteenth article 
claimants emigrated to the Choctaw Nation in Indian Territory be- 
tween 1855 and 1898. 

Up to 1895 the Choctaws west freely admitted to citizenship all 
those whom they knew to be of Choctaw blood, and who actually be- 
came residents of the Choctaw Nation west. 

On March 3, 1893, Congress authorized the Dawes Commission to 
enter into negotiations with the Indians of the Five Civilized Tribes 
to bring about such changes as would be necessary to allot the land 
in severalty and to prepare Indian Territory for a territorial form of 
government, and eventually for admission as a State into the Union. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 9 

On November 15, 1895, the council of the Choctaw Nation passed 
a general law requiring all persons claiming the right to citizenship 
in the Choctaw Nation, to file their applications within a certain time 
or be forever barred. (Laws of the Choctaw Nation, sess. 1895 and 
1896.) 

On June 10, 1896, a law was enacted by Congress directing the 
Dawes Commission to prepare rolls of citizenship for each of the 
Five Civilized Tribes. This act required the Dawes Commission to 
recognize all tribal laws in the makinof of the rolls. (See 29 Stat. L., 
321. See also Eastern Band of Cherokces v. United States, 117 U. S., 
288.) 

The act of June 7, 1897 (30 Stat. L., 83), is the first law passed by 
Congress in regard to the allotment in severalty of the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw estate in which the Mississippi Choctaws are mentioned. 
That act provided : 

That the coniniispion appointed to negotiate with the Five Civilized Tribes 
in the Indian Territory shall examine and report to Congress whether the Missis- 
sippi Choctaws iinder their treaties are not entitled to all the rights of Choctaw 
citizenship, except an interest in the Choctaw annnities. 

Under this provision the commission proceeded to the State of 
Mississippi and thoroughly investigated the rights of the Indians 
residing in that State. Under date of January 28, 1898, the com- 
mission submitted a report to Congress. In this report the commis- 
sion arrived at the following conclusion : 

It follows, therefore, from this reasoning, as well as from the historical 
review already recited, that the nature of the title itself as well as all stipula- 
tions concerning it in the treaties between the United States and the Choctaw 
Nation, that to avail himself of the " privileges of a Choctaw citizen " any 
person claiming to be a descendant of those Choctaws who were provided for 
in the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830 must first show the fact that 
he is such descendant and has in good faith joined his brethren in the Terri- 
tory with the intent to become one of the citizens of the nation. Plaving done 
so, such jiersou has a right to be enrolled as a Choctaw citizen and to claim 
all the privileges of such a citizen, except to a share in the annuities. And 
that otherwise he can not claim as a right the " privilege of a Choctaw citizen." 

Mr. Bali^inger. The same report to which you make reference 
recommended the question be referred to the Court of Claims for 
decision, did it not ? 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Ballinger, you asked me in the beginning of your 
statement to allow you to state your case before I interrupted you, 
and I would ask for the same consideration. When I complete my 
opening statement of the case I will answer any question you may 
ask me. 

Mr. Post. Did the Dawes Commission make a roster of the Mis- 
sissippi Indians who would come under the fourteenth article? 

Mr. Hurley. The next point in this statement will cover the ques- 
tion that you have asked, but I will say to you that the Dawes Com- 
mission did submit a roll of claimants under the fourteenth article, 
but in submitting the roll stated that those who offered their names 
were unable to prove their identity. That is, to prove that they were 
the descendants of those who had signified or attempted to signify 
their intention to claim right under the fourteenth article. 

Under the act of June 10, 1896, Jack Amos and 97 other Missis- 
sippi Choctaws appealed to the district court in and for the central 



10 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

district of Indian Territory from a decision of the Dawes Commis- 
sion. They claimed right to enroHment as nonresident citizens of the 
Choctaw Nation. The claimants had been rejected by the commis- 
sion on the ground that they were nonresidents. The attorneys for 
Jack Amos and others contended then, as the present attorneys for 
the Mississippi Choctaw claimants now contend, that the Mississippi 
Choctaws were entitled to enrollment as citizens of the Choctaw Na- 
tion without removing to Indian Territory. The decision of the 
court is in part as follows : 

In tlie tliii'd article of tlie trenty the Clioctaws agreed to move all of their 
]ieoi)le within three years, and the United States intended that they should go. 
But. by the fourteenth article of the treaty, provisions were made whei'eby 
those who should decide to remain and become citizens of the State of Mis- 
sissippi, in the event that, because of the intolerance and persecutions of the 
whites which they themselves had so bitterly experienced, or for any other 
cause, they might become dissatisfied with their altered conditions and their 
Dew citizenship and desii'e to follow them to their new homes and thereafter 
exercise with them in their own coiuitry the privileges of citizenship, they 
could do so, except that they were not to participate with them in their 
annuities, the lands which they were to receive in Mississippi being deemed a 
compensation for that. 

Vv'hen the fourteenth article of the treaty was framed the negotiating parties 
understood that the policy of the United States was that the Choctaws were 
to be removed. The Choctaws, in article 3, had just agreed that they should 
all go. The ink was not yet dry in article 2, whereby the condition was placed 
in this grant to the lands that they were to live upon them or they should be 
forfeited, and that no privilege of citizenship could be conferred or enjoyed 
outside of the territorial jurisdiction of their iiewly located nation. Under- 
standing these conditions, the latter clause of article 14 was penned : 

■' Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a 
Choctaw citizen, but if they ever remove — that is, if they ever place themselves 
on the land and within the jurisdiction of the nation whereby those privileges 
may become operative — are not to be entitled to any portion of the Choctaw 
annuity." 

In other words, if they ever remove, they are to enjoy all of the privileges 
of a Choctaw citizen except that of participating in their annuities. If this 
be not the meaning to be attached to the word "remove" as used in the clause 
of the treaty under consideration, it must be meaningless. But in the interpre- 
tation of statutes it is the duty of the courts to so interpret them as to give to 
every word a meaning, and in so doing so it must talve into consideration the 
whole statute, its objects and purposes, the rights which are intended to be 
enforced, and the evils intended to be remedied; it may go to the histoi-y of 
tlie transaction about which the legislation is had and call to its aid all legiti- 
mate facts proven or of which the courts will take judicial notice in order to 
find the true meaning of the word as used in the statute. Of course, the same 
rule of interpretation applies to trenties. Adopting these rules in the interpre- 
tation of article 14 of the treaty of 1830, I arrive at the conclusion that the 
" privilege of a Choctaw citizen " therein reserved to those Choctaws who shall 
remain, thereby separating themselves, it may be forever, from their brethren 
and their nation, becoming citizens of another sovereignty and aliens of their 
own, situated so that it would be impossible, while in Mississippi, to receive or 
enjoy any of the rights of Choctaw citizenship, was the right to renounce his 
allegiance to the Commonwealth of Mississippi, move upon the lands con- 
veyed to him and his people, and there, the only spot on earth where he could 
do so, renew his relations with his people and enjoy all of the privileges of a 
Choctaw citizen except to participate in the annuities. 

As an evidence that the Choctaw people themselves took this view of the 
question, attention is called to the fact that their council has passed many acts 
and I'esolntions inviting these absent Choctaws to move into their country, and 
on one occasion appropriated a considei'able sum of money to assist them on 
their journey, and. until the past two or three years, have always promptly 
placed those who did return on the rolls of citizenship, but never enrolled an 
absent Choctaw as a citizen. 



ENEOLLMEXT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. H 

This decision was virtually affirmed by the Supreme Court of the 
United States, which held that the act of Congress giving final juris- 
diction in these matters to the district court is constitutional. (See 
Sephens v. Cherokee Nation, 174 U. S., 445.) 

The act of June 28, 1898 (30 Stat. L., 495), authorized the com- 
mission to determine the identity of Choctaws claiming rights in the 
Choctaw lands under article 14 of the treaty between the United 
States and the Choctaw Nation, concluded September 27, 1830, and 
to that end to administer oaths, examine witnesses, and perform all 
otlier acts necessary thereto, and make report to the Secretary of 
the Interior. 

On March 10, 1889, the Dawes Commission made its report on 
identification, as follows: 

The commission, therefore, findintr it impossible to trace tlie full-blood ChoC' 
taws now residing in the State of Mississippi bearing an English name with 
any degree of certainty to his ancestors bearing Indian names, and to establish 
the fact that such ancestors performed the duty of signifying to the United 
States agent within tlie limited period their intention and desire to remain and 
become citizens of the States, has believed it to be its duty to report the names 
of all full-blood Choctaw Indians who might appear before it in said State for 
identification as Mississippi Choctaws, and it accordingly makes such report, 
having talien the names and identification of each of such persons and prepared 
a schedule of them from the data obtained by the commission recently within 
said State, which schedule accompanies this report as a part hereof. * * * 

It is impossible to trace descendants now bearing English names to ancestors 
bearing Indian names, upon whom was imposed the duty of complying with the 
treaty at tliat time, and to connect persons now living with the fulfillment of 
the requirements of the provisions of article 14 of said treaty. 

The Secretary of the Interior declined to approve this schedule 
for the reason that the persons who made this schedule frankly ad- 
mitted that it was not supported by evidence. A careful considera- 
tion of the figures showing the number of Choctaws who established 
their claims under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1842 will 
show conclusively why there was no one in Mississippi at the time 
the investigation was made by the Dawes Commission, in 1899, who 
could establish their rights under that article. The fact is that in 
1842 only 4,161 persons could establish their right under that article. 
Before 1855, 3.400 of those who established their rights removed to 
the Choctaw Nation, leaving less than 700 in Mississippi, A great 
many others of these claimants removed during the period from 
1855 to 1896. The fact is that there were extremely few, if any, 
foiu-teenth article Choctaws in Mississippi in 1899. There were, of 
course, other Choctaws there who had rights in Mississippi awarded 
them under the nineteenth and supplementary articles of the treaty 
of 1830. These Indians had no rights to the privilege of a Choctaw 
citizen in the Choctaw Nation reserved to them under the treaty. 

On May 31, 1900 (31 Stat. L., 221), Congress enacted the follow- 
ing law : 

Mr. Post. Before you go further I want to ask you how many full- 
blood Mississippi Choctaws were reported by the Dawes Commission? 

Mr. Hurley. The McKennan roll contained 1,923 persons. They 
were not all full bloods. I have not any figures with me to show the 
quantum of blood of the different persons whose names appear upon 
the McKennan roll. 



12 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

]\Ir. Post. When was that roll completed? 

Mr. Hurley. In 1899. The act of May 31, 1900, which I had com- 
menced to read, is as follows: 

That any Mississippi Choctaw duly identified as such by the United States 
Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes shall have the right, at any time prior 
to the approval of the final rolls of the Choctaws and Chickasaws by the Secre- 
tary of the Interior, to make settlement within the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, 
and on proof of the facts of bona fide settlement may be enrolled by the said 
United States Commission and by the Secretary of the Interior as Choctaws 
entitled to allotments: Provided further, That all contracts or agreements look- 
ing to the sale or encumbrance in any way of the lands to be allotted to said 
Mississippi Choctaws shall be null and void. 

Mr. Post. How long were the rolls held open on that account ? 

Mr. HuRL?:r. Six months after they had been closed to all other 
claimants. 

Mr. Carter. Had the Choctaws and Chickasaws ever agreed to the 
Federal Government making their rolls prior to the agreement of 
1902? 

Mr. Hurley. No, sir. 

Mr. Campbell. Do I understand that prior to that time that the 
Choctaws reserved the right to themselves to make up their own 
rolls? 

Mr. Hurley. The United States Government, under the act of 
June 10, 1896, had taken upon itself the responsibility of making the 
rolls for the Choctaws and Chickasaws. The Choctaws and Chicka- 
saws already had rolls, which were taken as a basis for the Govern- 
ment rolls. The agreement between the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
people and the United States as to the final settlement of the enroll- 
ment question was contained in the supplemental treaty in 1902. 

Mr. Carter. Who had jurisdiction of making the rolls of the Choc- 
taws and Chickasaws prior to the act of 1896? 

Mr. Hurley. The Government of the United States — the Dawes 
Commission. 

Mr. Carter. Prior to that time? 

]\rr. Hurley. Oh. prior to 1896—1 thought you meant 1902— the 
Choctaws and Chickasaws themselves. 

Mr. Carter. But in the agreement of 1898 nothing was said con- 
cerning the jurisdiction of making rolls, was there? 

Mr. Hurley. The jurisdiction of making the rolls was given to 
the Dawes Commission by the act of June 10, 1896; that was au- 
thority to put names on the then existing rolls. There was not any 
authority given under that act to purge the rolls. It was the act 
of June 28, 1898, commonly known as the Curtis Act, that gave the 
commission authority to purge the rolls; that is, to strike therefrom 
the names of persons who were not entitled to enrollment. 

Mr. Carter. The thing I want to understand is this: That the 
tribal authorities had never given their consent to the Federal Gov- 
ernment making the rolls, and in fact objected to the Federal Gov- 
ernment taking that jurisdiction until July 1, 1902? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Had the tribal authorities ever permitted the enroll- 
ment and citizenship of absent Choctaws while they had the juris- 
diction of making their rolls? 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. » 13 

Mr, Hurley. There is not one instance in the history of either 
the Choctaw or Chickasaw Nation where they ever enrolled an ab- 
sentee as a citizen of either one of those tribes. 

Mr. Carter. Had the tribal authorities ever permitted enrollment 
on the citizenship rolls of Choctaws who moved from Mississippi 
to their nation without a special act of their council authorizing 
same ? 

Mr. Hurley. No, sir ; under the laws and customs of the Choctaw 
people it was necessary even for the Mississippi fourteenth-article 
claimants to be readmitted to citizenship in the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Carter. And he had no rights as a citizen until favorable 
action had been taken by the council? 

Mr. Hurley. That is right. 

]\Ir. Richardson. Was that the case before 1855, when the Choc- 
taw constitution was adopted? 

Mr. Hurley. You mean when the}^ arrived in the Choctaw Nation 
they had to apply through the council and become citizens? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes. 

Mr. Hurley. The records of the council that far back are hard 
to get and I have not found any records of admission to citizenship 
that far back. Up to that time there was almost a constant stream 
of emigration, and those who settled that far back are not even con- 
sidered as Mississippi Choctaws, but as original Choctaws, by peo- 
ple in the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Campbell, Have you the acts so that you can enumerate them 
authorizing the action by commissions or courts for the enrollment of 
jMississippi Choctaw^s, the extension of tie, etc., so we can get the 
number of acts that have been had ? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Campbell. Can you enumerate them, with their dates? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. If I understand correctly, up until 1855 the migra^ 
tion of the Choctaws from Mississippi to Indian Territory was so 
constant and unbroken that no one prior to that time was required 
to have an act of the council to admit him to citizenship; he was 
accepted as a nati^^e Choctaw when he came to Mississippi ? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. But after 1855 

Mr. Hurley (interposing). After the adoption of the Choctaw 
constitution. 

Mr. Carter. After the adoption of the Choctaw constitution was 
any Mississippi Choctaw admitted to citizenship in the Choctaw 
Nation in the Indian Territory Avithout first having a fovorable act 
of the Choctaw council? 

Mr. Hurley. No, sir; not after the adoption of their constitution. 

Mr. Carter. And the constitution was adopted in 1855, is that 
true? 

Mr, Hurley. It was. 

To supply Mr. Campbell with the information he asked I will 
gi\e now the dates of all acts that have an effect upon the enrolment 
question in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. 

Mr. Carti-:r. Acts of the Choctaw council ? 



14 ' ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. Hurley. No; he asked for the acts of Congress. The first 
is the act of June 10, 1896, 28 Statutes, 321. 

Mr. Campbell. They are right here in convenient form, are they? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. I should like to have them go into this 
tecord. They are as follows: 

A. Acts of a general and preliminary character: (1) June 10, 1S96 (29 Stat. 
L.. 321) ; (2) June 7, 1897 (30 Stat. L., 83) ; (3) June 28. 1898 (30 Stat. L., 
495) (conunonly Ivuown as the Curtis Act, including the Atoka agreement) ; 
(4) May 31, 1900 (31 Stat. L., 221). 

B. Acts of a special character: (1) Agreement with the Seminoles, December 
16, 1897, approved July 1, 1898 (30 Stat. L., 567) ; (5) agreement with the 
Choctaws and Chickasaws, approved July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. L., 641), and rati- 
fied by said tribes September 25, 1902. 

Mr. Campbell. The acts of the Choctaw council, touching the same 
question, are also tabulated, are they not? 

Mr. Hurley. No; I have a list of some of the acts. It would be 
impractable to tabulate them all in this record, there are several 
hundred of them affecting different families and individuals. I 
have a sufficient number of them here to give you a general idea of 
the nature of the acts of the Choctaw council on this subject. I 
should now like to finish this preliminary statement before I proceed 
any further with argimients on it, because I expect to present my 
argument after I have made a statement of the case. I was speaking 
of the act of May 31, 1901, when I was interrupted. 

Under this law the commission continued to receive and consider 
the applications of the Mississippi Choctaw Indians. It soon became 
apparent, however, that the Indians residing in ISIississippi were 
unable to prove that they were descendants of persons who had 
complied, or had attempted to comply, with article 14 of the treaty 
of 1830. When it was finally determined that the Mississippi Choc- 
taws were unable to prove any right to enrollment the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Indians of Oklahoma agreed to give the full-blood In- 
dians of Mississippi the right to citizenship in the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations if they would remove to and establish a l:»ona fide 
residence within the confines of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. 
This concession was made on the part of the Choctaws and Chicka- 
saws upon the inducement that if they would make the concession 
the United States Government would proceed immediately to close 
the tribal rolls and complete allotment of the land in severalty, and 
thereafter to sell the residue of the tribal estate and distribute the 
proceeds per capita among the enrolled members of the tribe. Ac- 
cordingly, the supplemental agreement was entered into between the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations and the United States. This agree- 
ment was approved by act of Congress on the 1st day of July, 1902 
(32 Stat. L., 641), and was ratified by the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
people on the 25th day of September of that year. 

This agreement held the rolls of citizenship of the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations open to INIississippi Choctaws after they had been 
closed to all other applicants. It established a ride of evidence in 
favor of the full-blood Mississippi Choctaws, and 1,634 Mississippi 
ChoctaAvs were under this legislation granted enrollment in the Choc- 
taw Nation as a gratuity and not as a matter of right. The property 
given to these 1,634 Indians is valued at not less than $15,000,000. 



ENKOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 15 

This is the price that the Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians of Okla- 
homa paid for a settlement of the Mississippi Choctaw question in 
1902. 

Sections 41, 42, 43, and 44 of the supplemental agreement above 
referred to are as follows : 

41. All persons duly identified by the Commission to ttie Five Civilized Tribes 
under the provisions of section 21 of the act of Congress approved June 28, 1898 
(30 Stilt. L.. 495). as Mississippi Choctaws entitled to benefits under article 
14 of the treaty between the United States and the Choctaw ^'ation. concluded 
September 27, 1830. may. at any time within six months after the date of their 
identification as Mississippi Choctaws by tlie said commission, make bona fide 
settlements within the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, and upon proof of such 
settlement to such connnission within one year after the date of their said 
identification as Mississippi Choctaws, shall be enrolled by such commission as 
Mississippi Choctaws entitled to allotment as herein provided for citizens of 
the tribe, subject to the special i)rovisions herein provided as to Mississippi 
Choctaws. and said enrollments shall be final when approved by the Secretary 
of the Interior. The application of no person for identification as a Mississippi 
Choctaw sliall be received by said commission after six months subsequent 
to the date of the final ratification of this agreement and in the disposition of 
such application all full-blood Mississippi Choctaw Indians and the descendants 
of any Mississippi Choctaw Indians, whether of full or mixed blood, who 
receive a patent to land under tlie said fourteenth article of the said treaty 
of 1830. who had not moved to and made bona fide settlement in the Choctaw- 
Chickasaw country prior to June 28, 1898. shall be deemed to be Mississippi 
Choctaws entitled to benefits under article 14 of the said treaty of September 
27. 1830. and to identification as such by said commission, but this direction 
or provision shall be deemed to be only a rule of evidence and shall not be 
invoked by or operate to the advantage of any applicant who is not a Missis- 
sippi Choctaw of the full blood or who is not the descendant of the Mississippi 
Choctaw who received a patent to land under said treaty, or who is otherwise 
barred from the right of citizenship in the Choctaw Nation. All of said Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws so enrolled by said commission shall be upon a separate roll. 

42. When any such Mississippi Choctaw shall have in good faith continuously 
resided upon the lands of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations for a period 
of three years, including his residence thereon before and after such enrollment, 
he shall, upon due proof thereof of such continuous bona fide residence made 
in such manner and before such oflicer as may be designated by the Secretary 
of the Interior, receive a patent for his allotment, as provided in the Atoka 
agreement, and he shall hold the land allotted to him, as provided in this 
agreement for citizens of tlie Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. 

43. Applications for enrollment as Mississippi Choctaws, and applications 
to have land set apart to them as such, roust be made personally before the 
Connnission to the Five Civilized Tribes. Fathers may apply for their minor 
children; and. if the father be dead, the mother may apply; husbands may 
apply for wives. Applications for ori)hans. insane persons, and persons of 
unsound mind may be made by duly appointed guardian or curator, and for 
aged and infirm j)ersons and prisoners by agents duly authorized thereunto 
by power of attorney in the discretion of said cmimission. 

44. If within four" years after such enrollment any such Mississippi Choctaw, 
or his heirs or representatives, if he be dead, fails to make proof of such con- 
tinuous bona fide residence for the period so prescribed, or up to the time of 
the death of such Mississippi Choctaw, in case of his death after enrollment, 
he and his heirs and rejiresentatives, if he be dead, shall be deemed to have 
acquired no interest in the lands set apart to him, and the same shall be sold 
at public auction for cash, under such rules and regulations proscribed by the 
Secretary of the Interior, and the ])roceeds paid into the Treasury of the TTnited 
States to the credit of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes, and distributed per 
ca|)it:i with other funds of the tribe. Such lands shall not be sold for less 
than their appraised value. Upon i)ayment of the full purchase price patent 
shall issue to the purchaser. 

The provision in section 41, above quoted, preventing the operation 
of the rule of evidence establislied to the advantage of any a]>pli- 
cant who is not a Mississippi ChoctaAV of full blood, or a descendant 



16 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

of a Choctaw who received a patent to land, was made more general 
by a decision of the Secretary of the Interior in the so-called Jim 
Gift case, which was rendered on November 23, 1904, holding that 
scripees and their descendants, as well as patentees, come within 
the rule referred to as being persons or descendants of persons who 
complied or attempted to comply with article 14 of the treaty of 
September 27, 1830. 

The same agreement between the United States and the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw people, which gave to the Mississippi Choctaws 
enrollment in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations as a gratuity 
provided also: 

No person whose name does not appear upon tbe rolls prepared as herein 
provided, shall be entitled in any manner to participate in the distribution 
of the common property of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes, and those 
whose names appear thereon shall participate in the manner set forth in 
this agreement. 

The rolls of citizenship of the Choctaw and CKickasaw Nations 
were finally completed under the terms of this agreement and, on 
April 26, 1906, Congress declared the Choctaw and Chickasaw rolls 
closed in the following language : 

Provided, That the rolls of the tribes (Choctaw and Chickasaw) affected by 
this act shall be fully completed on or before the 4th day of March. 1907. and 
the Secretarj' of the Interior shall have no jurisdiction to approve the enroll- 
ment of any person after that date. 

The Choctaws who remained in Mississippi and declined to remove 
to Indian Territory had been separated from the Choctaw Nation 
for a period of 77 years before the rolls were closed. During all of 
this period of 77 years the Mississippi Choctaws had a right to re- 
move to and establish a residence in the Choctaw Nation, and thereb)'^ 
become entitled to the privileges of a Choctaw citizen, notwithstand- 
ing the fact that each and every fourteenth-article claimant had re- 
ceived his or her patrimony in land, money, or script. In other 
words, these Mississippi Choctaws did receive land and money in 
Mississippi at a time when the Choctaws in Oklahoma were under- 
going the privations of frontier life, and these same persons who 
had receiA'ed the land and money in Mississippi might have removed, 
and most all of them did remove to Indian Territory and become en- 
titled to an equal share in the property of the Choctaw Nation with 
the Choctaws who had resided w^est and who received no part of 
the land or money distributed to the Mississippi Choctaws. It is 
those who have received land and money and who have declined 
to move to the Choctaw Nation that are now asking that the Choc- 
taws of Oklahoma send money to them in Mississippi. 

The preparation of the final rolls of the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations by the United States Government cover a period of 11 years. 
During that time 24,634 applications of persons claiming as Missis- 
sippi Choctaws for enrollment as citizens of the Choctaw Nation, 
were considered and reconsidered, and finally determined by the 
Dawes Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes and the Federal 
courts for Indian Territory. The Mississippi Choctaw claim which 
you are now considering has heretofore been fully considered and de- 
termined by the following tribunals and bodies : 

1. The Dawes Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 17 

2. The Federal courts of Indian Territory. 

3. The Choctaw and Chickasaw people, and the United States 
Government in the preparation of the supplemental agreement of 
July 1, 1902. (32 Stat. L., 641, ibid.) 

4. The Congress of the United States which finally dir* 'tod the 
rolls to be closed on March 4, 1907. (See act of Apr. 20, 1!)U6, ibid.) 

The question that you gentlemen are now considering has four 
times been determined under the direction of Congress, and the rolls 
have finally been closed and the Choctaw and Chickasaw people and 
the United States (lovernment have agreed that no one shall share 
in the distriljution of the tribal funds of those tribes unless his or 
her name appears upon the rolls completed under the provisions of 
the supplemental agreement. 

There is a corporation known as the Texas-Oklahoma Investment 
Co., organized for the purpose of syndicating the claims of the 
Mississippi Choctaws against the Choctaw Nation. This company 
has already furnished $4,100 to maintain representation in Washing- 
ton for the purpose of inducing Congress to reopen the rolls of the 
Choctavv' and Chickasavr Nations and to enroll the Mississippi Choc- 
taws. It may be that this syndicate will be able to induce the Con- 
gress of the United States to reverse the decision of the commission 
that it authorized to determine this question; to re\erse the de- 
cision of the United States courts that passed upon the question; 
to induce Congress to violate the terms of a solemn treaty agreement 
with the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations of Oklahoma ; and finally, 
to repeal the act of Congress of April 26, 1906, by the operation ot 
which the rolls of these tribes were finally closed. If, in the name 
of justice, this Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co. can induce Congress 
to allow that comj)any to extract from the Treasury the funds be- 
longing to the Choctaw and Chicasaw people, the United States may 
yet have to refund to the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations the amount 
of money that it would at this time force the tribes to pay to the 
Mississippi Choctaws and to the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co. 
on this illegal and unconscionable claim. In fact, the United States 
Government, through its Interior Department, has already recog- 
nized the possibility of a recovery by the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations against the United States in case the Government sliould 
provide for the enrollment of the Mississippi Choctaws. 

The First Assistant Secretary of the Interior in a letter dated 
July 2, 1912, addressed to the chairman of the Connnission on Indian 
Affairs of the House of Representatives, made the following state- 
ment : 

I nil! .'(isist'd tluit if tlie work <»!" n'!Hve.stiK:itiii.i; ;ni(l veiUljudicatiiiR the 
fl;:inis of Mi.ssissippi Clioct.nvs he uinlcrtaken alonj; the broail lines outlined 
in the bill introduced by Mr. Harrison, the work fan not b,» .icL'onipll.shed 
within the time jaesoribed thoi'oin : th;it if the apijlicants arc required to estab- 
lish that they or some of their jincstors wore beneficiaries under article 14 
of the treaty of 1S30, a vast anioiuit of evidence will necessarily h;ive to be 
taken coverinji the family liistory of the aiiplicants for niore than 80 years; 
and that this work would be :i repetition of work whicli has already been 
.•icconiplished. and in the >rreat majority of oases would be of no benefit what- 
ever lo the ai)plicants. * * * 

\Vi!h respect to the l.OTO i>ersons wlio were identitied as Mississippi Choctaws 
iiat who failed to prove the tacts of reinov.il nnd seUlemeut in tlu- f'hoct.iw .'ind 

sssr.rv— ir. 2 



18 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Chickasaw coiiiitiy, it amy be said that, irrespective of their unfortunate condi- 
tion of poverty and ignorance, there is grave question whether there is just 
ground, legal or equitable, for holding the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
resj)onsible for this failure to comply with the law. In fact, it may be urged 
by the tribes that responsibility, if any, rested upon the United States instead. 

Now, gentlemen, I have attempted to give you a brief outline of 
the Mississippi Choctaw claim. In this outline I have not touched 
upon many of the matters that have been argued by attorneys repre- 
senting the claimants. I have not touched upon those matters for 
the reason that they are irrelevant and incompetent, and do not tend 
to prove or disprove any of the issues pending before this committee. 

It may be necessary, however, to consider some of the statements 
made, because those statements are responsible for the opinion that 
now seems to prevail in the minds of some of the members of Con- 
gress to the effect that there must be some merit somewhere in the 
Mississippi Choctaw claim. That sentiment, Mr. Chairman, has 
been built up by misstatements in places where, if the facts were 
stated as they exist, it would clearly appear that the Mississippi 
Choctaws have not been deprived of any right by the Choctaw 
Nation ; they have had their day in court ; they have been allowed to 
make their applications; they have failed to establish a right, and 
those who have been enrolled have been enrolled as a gratuity. This 
would appear if the facts were fairly presented; but they have not 
always been so presented. I might say in this connection that in Mr. 
Harrison's different addresses on the floor of the House in regard to 
this matter, I think that he relied somewhat, and I would not say 
entirely, upon the briefs and arguments prepared by Mr. Cantwell, 
or by Crews & Cantwell, and that those briefs and those arguments 
are egregiously incorrect. 

Mr. Post. Mr, Hurley, I understood your position a while ago to 
be that the rolls are made of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
by the treaty and supplemental treaty, and were closed by the terms 
of that treaty? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Post. If that is true, what authority has Congress to go back 
of its treaty obligations? 

Mr. Hurley. The Congress has absolutely no moral authority to 
do so. To do so would be in violation of good morals. But the Con- 
gi-ess of the United States has plenary power over undistributed 
tribal property, and, regardless of the equities of the Indians — 
regardless of the justice and the morality involved — Congress can 
force a reconsideration of that question by reason of its plenary 
power, if it desires to exercise it; but in doing so it will create a lia- 
bility against the United States for the amount of our loss under 
such legislation. 

Mr. Ballinger. Were these rolls closed by any provision or in 
any agreement with the Choctaw Indians? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Ballinger. In what treaty? 

Mr. Hurley. I have read it into the record. If you had been pay- 
ing attention to me when I read it you might have heard it. I will 
go back and read it again. 

Mr. Campbell. Can Congress exercise this plenary power without 
making the United States liable to the Choctaws or Chickasaws for 
the property that it will take from them? 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 19 

Mr. HiRLEY. In my judgment it can not. 

Mr. Post. Mr. Hurley, under the Constitution the treaty-malring 
[xnver is vested in the President and the Senate. But this treaty- 
how -was it entered into — the treaty and the supplemental treay? 

Mr. Hurley. This agreement was entered into between a commis- 
sion appointed by Congress and the representatives of the Indian 
tribes. For a long period in the history of the Indians of North 
America it was considered that a treaty betw^een an Inditm tribe and 
the United States had some of the binding force of an international 
agreement. Subsequently Congress found that in order to handle 
some of the Indian tribes and open their lands to settlement it became 
necessary — this is rather blunt language — to disregard some of those 
treaty provisions, and an act was passed in 1871 changing entirely 
the nature and the force of Indian treaties; thereafter it was held 
that those agreements have not the binding force of an international 
agreement and were merely a request from the Indian people as to 
what they would like to have done, and might be repealed as any 
other act of Congress. 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Hurley, is it not a fact that Congress has the 
same right to violate international agreements that it has to violate 
a treaty with the Indians? 

Mr. Hurley. It has. 

Mr. Carter. Congress undoubtedly has the power to abrogate any 
treaty "vvith either Indian or world power. The world jiower may 
have its redress by a resort to arms — that is. until the Hague tri- 
bunal is permanently established — but the Indian's reparation rests 
entirely upon the benevolence and justice of the white man's Govern- 
ment itself. But Congress has a right to repeal any treaty it has 
with a foreign power, has it not? 

Mr. Hurley. That is true ; it has. The only difference is that the 
Indian question is not an international question, but a domestic 
question, and the Indian tribes, being dependent upon the United 
States, can not obtain redress for violations of agreements without 
the consent of the United States. 

Mr. RicHARnsoN. I might call the attention of the committee to 
the fact that the Attorney General, on the question of the Chinese 
treaty, held that an act of Congress could modify or repeal any 
provision of a treaty, and that a treaty had no superior authority to 
an act of Congress. 

Also that Congress, in the act of March 3, 1871, provided that from 
that time no treaty should be made with any Indian tribe. U]) to 
the date of that net a treaty with the Indians was regarded in the 
courts as of the same force as a treaty with an international power, 
but after tliat time there have been no treaties with the Indians. 

Mr. Carter. They have been agi'eements? 

Mr. T^iCHARDSON. They have been mere agreements, subject to the 
ratification by Congress and subject to all provisions 

INIr. Post (interposing). In other words, a treaty with an Indian 
tribe entered into by officers of the Government, a department of the 
Government, and the tribe had to be ratified by Congress, and it 
was really an act of Congress, which Congress itself could repeal 
at any time it saw fit? 

Mr. EiciiARDSON. That is correct. 



20 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. Post. It is different in that respect to un international agree- 
ment? 

Mr. EiCHARDSON. That is right. 

Mr. Ballinger. I should like to call the attention of the committee 
that the courts held Avith reference to these agreements, or similar 
agreements, (hat they stood solely on the same plane as an act of 
Congress and were not in fact agreements. 

Mr. Carter. That is true of both agreements and treaties. Con- 
gress has full power to repeal them so long as vested rights are not 
involved. 

Mr. EiciiARDSON. The Brown and Gritts case. 

Mr. Carter. The Brown and Gritts case is identical with one of 
these agreements; not this agreement, but the Cherokee 'agreement. 

Mr. EiciiARDSON. At the same time. 

Mr. Carter. Let me ask Mr. Hurley a few questions about making 
that agreement, because it has often been referred to on the floor of 
the House and in the committee as the act of one man. I speak now 
of the agreement of July 1, 1902. The people who first negotiated 
that agreeinent were commissioners ap})ointed by the United States 
and delegates appointed by the Choctaw and Chickasaw governors 
upon !in act authorizina: the same by the tribal council, were they 
not? 

Mr. HiTULEY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Do you knoAv how many meetings wore lu^nl bcfoi-e 
those agreements were finally concluded ? 

Mr. Hurley. No ; I do not. 

Mr. Carter. Do you know Avhen negotiations began for the agi-ee- 
ments ? 

Mr. IIuiv'LEY. They 1)egan in 1901. 

Mr. Carter. And thev were not concluded until September 27, 
1902? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. So they Avere a year and a half in the process of mak- 
ing, were they not? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. After they were finally negotiated they had to be 
approved by the Congress of the United States, did they not? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sii*. 

Mr. Carter. They had to l)e appi-oved by the tribal councils of the 
Choctaw and ChickasaAv Nations? 

Mr. Hurley. The treaty Avas finally ratified by 

Mr. (^ARTER (interposing). I have not got to that yet. 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir: they had to be approved by the councils. 

Mr. Carter. Of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. And afterAvards had to be ratified in accordance with 
the act of those councils by a general vote of the Choctaw and 
ChickasaAv people? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. And all these actions the records show have been 
taken, do they not? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 21 

Mr. Carter. So that the agreements were a year and a half in the 
making, and were approved in the regular manner prescribed and 
usual in the making of such agreements or treaties? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. Now, Mr. Chairman, in order to get into 
some of the arguments that have been made that seem to have in- 
fluenced the minds of the Members of Congress, I want to read just 
one paragraph from a speech made by Mr. Harrison on the floor of 
the House in December, 1912, and I am reading from page 4, as 
follows: 

Tlu> Tndifin tribe has never attempted to abridge or change in any way this 
I)arti(iil;ir treaty. * * * Jn other words. Mi-. Chairman, every act of Con- 
gress that has been passed rehitive to the Mississippi Choctaws has been nix)n 
the assumption that they could not be enrolled unless they left Mississippi and 
went to Indian Territory, thus being forced to violate the article they had de- 
manded and obtained. There is nothing in that provision that says that the 
.Mississippi Choctaw shall ever have to leave Mississippi in order to continue 
his right as a member of the tribe. 

Without going into any explanation of the matter, Mr. Harrison 
stated to Congress that the Indian tribes had never made any effort 
to abridge the privileges of those Indians to become citizens of the 
Choctaw Xation while they resided in Mississippi. As a matter 
of fact the nation never recognized one of them as a citizen until 
he removed to the Choctaw Nation, and on the 16th day of October, 
1895, the council of the Choctaw Nation passed this act: 

Resolution in regard to citizenship cases. 

Section 1. Be it resolved ly the General Council of the Choctaw Nation as- 
sembled, That all parties who claim citizenship to the Choctaw Nation, and 
intend proving the same, are hereby notified that they must file their petitions 
as the law directs, on or before November 15th, 1895. as after said date no peti- 
tions will be entertained by the Choctaw Nation, and all parties who have their 
petitions filed are hereby notified that they must come forward and prosecute 
the same at once. 

Sec. 2. Be it further resolved, That the national secretary is hereby requested 
to have this resolution printed in all the principal papers in the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations, and that the sheriffs of each county are hereby notified to 
post this resolution in conspicuous places in tlieir respective counties. 

Approved, October 16, A. D. 1895. 

Jeff Gardner, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

It will readily be seen, Mr. Chairman, that a statement to the 
effect that the tribes have never attempted to foreclose all non- 
resident claims of citizenship can not be substantiated, because as 
a matter of fact the tribe, after having labored for something like 
70 years to get those Mississippi Choctaws and their descendants to 
move to the Choctaw Nation, after having appropriated money to 
pay for their transportation, and after having appropriated money 
to 'maintain certain families of them after their arrival until they 
could make a crop, when they finally decided that they had done 
all they could to help those people and had helped them as a gratuity 
and not l)("cauHe of any right that the Mississippi Choctaws had, they 
finally closed their rolls against them, and the tribal authorities have 
placed a bar against the enrollment of these persons. 

Now. as stated in my argument in the beginning, the act of Con- 
gress of June 10. 1896, provided that the commission making the 



22 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

rolls should give due deference and consideration to all laws, cus- 
toms, and usages of the Choctaw people. 

Let us see what binding effect that act of the Choctaw council 
has upon the United States. The Supreme Court had before it at 
one time the claim of the Eastern Cherokees against the United 
States. It is reported in 117 United States, 228, and is as follows: 

If tbe Iiuliiins ia tb;it State [North Carolina], or iu any other State east of 
the Mississippi wish to enjoy the benefits of the conunon property of the 
Cherolcee Nation, in whatever form it may exist, they must, as held by the 
Court of Claims, comply with the constitution and laws of the Cherokee Nation, 
and be readmitted to citizenship as there provided. They can not live out 
of its territory, evade the obligations .-lud burdens of citizenship, and at the 
same time enjoy the benefits of the funds and common property of the nation. 
Those funds and that property were dedicate<l by the constitution of the 
Cherokees and were intended by the treaties with the Unitetl States for the 
benefit of the united nation, and not in any respect for those who had separated 
from it and become aliens to their nation. We Ciin see no just ground on which 
the claim of the petitioners can rest in either of the funds held by the United 
States iu trust for the Cherokee Nation. 

The Congress of the United States recognized this principal in 
the act of June 10, 1896 (29 Stat. L., 321), which directed the making 
of the rolls as follows : 

That iu determining all such applications said commission shall respect all 
laws of the several nations or tribes not inconsistent with the laws of the 
United States. * * * 

So, we see Mr. Harrison was mistaken when he said the tribes had 
never attempted to abridge the privileges given Mississippi Choc- 
taws under the treaty of 1830. 

The tribe has never recognized a nonresident as a citizen of the 
tribe, and has by act of the council placed a limitation on the time 
during which nonresident Indians could come into the nation and 
reestablish their citizenship. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, if the chair desires to have me do so, I would 
be glad to read into the record at this place a number of the acts of 
the Choctaw council giving aid to emigrating Mississippi Choctaws 
prior to 1895, showing the disposition of the Choctaw^ Nation up to 
that time to receive those people without requiring them to prove a 
legal right to enrollment. They were given citizenship in the nation 
as a gratuity. Not only has the Choctaw Nation given them citizen- 
ship as a gratuity, but it has transported many to Indian Territory 
and supported them until they could raise a crop after their arrival 
in the Indian Territory. 

Mr. Ballinger. Is there any statement contained in any act of tlie 
Choctaw Nation that rights accorded to Mississippi Choctaws who 
removed are gratuities? You have used the Avord " gratuity "' numer- 
ous times. 

Mr. Hurley. I have used the word "gratuity,"' Mr. Ballinger, be- 
cause that is exactly what was given them. If you are fair in this 
argument you must admit that the Dawes Counuissi(^n tliat in 1899 
examined the Indians in Mississippi who claimed right to enrollment 
in the Choctaw Nation under article 14 was unprejudiced, and it 
found that those people could not prove any right under the four- 
teenth article: that after it had been established that they could not 
prove their right; that the ChoctaAv and ChickasaAV Nations gave 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 23 

them enrollment without requiring them to establish that right by 
proper evidence. Now, what is that if it is not a gratuity^ 

Mr. Ballinger. Can you point to any act of the Choctaw Nation 
that gave them that right? That was given to them by an act of 
Congress, was it not ? 

Mr. Hurley. That was given to them by an agreement between the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw people and the United States Government, 
commonly known as the supplemental agreement of July 1, 1002. 

Mr. Carter. Let me suggest that you might just incorporate those 
acts of the council in the record without taking the time of the com- 
mittee to read them. 

Mr. Hurley. I want to incorporate, on the suggestion of the chair- 
man, as follows: 

LAWS PASSED BY THE GENERAL COUNCIL OF THE CHOCTAW NATION AT ITS REGULAR 
SESSION COMMENCING OCTOBER 6, 1890. 

No. 16. 

An act recognizing certain persons as citizens of this nation. 

Be it enacted by the General Council of the Choctaw Nation as.femhled. That 
Sandos Anios, his wife Ann, and William Amos, and Solomon Wilson and wife 
and their four children, all full-blood Choctaws and lately come to this nation 
from Mississippi, be. and they are hereby, recognized as citizens of the Choctaw 
Nation, and entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of citizens, and 
this act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage. 
Approved, October 29, 1890. 

W. N. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

No. 17. 

.\n act conferring citizenship on certain persons named. 

Be it enacted hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation assemhlcd. That 
Sexton Amos, Mat Sukke, Amos Bell, Jimson Bell. John Alusion, Sarah Wilson, 
Isaac Wilson, Mary Wilson, Eve Wilson, Horace Wilson, Thomas Barney. I,«iaac 
Simpson, and Tom Yark. all late of the State of Mississippi, are hereby recog- 
nized as citizens of this nation and entitled to all the rights, privileges, and 
immunities of citizens of this nation, and this act shall take effect and be ia 
force from and after its passage. 

Approved. October 30, 1890. 

W. N. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Choctatv Nation. 

No. 25. 

.\n act couferi-ing citizenship on Mrs. Treliern and otlicr Mississippi Choctaws. 

Be it enacted by the General Council of the Choctaw Nation assembled. That 
Mrs. Trehorn and her children. Joel Trehern. Joseph Trehern. Laura (Trehern') 
Walker, her husband Sam Walker and two children. Hannah (Trehern) 
Deloach. her husband Josei)h Deloach and their three children, all Lite of the 
State of Mississippi, be, and are hereby, recognized as citizens of the Choctaw 
Nation and entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of citizens of 
this nation, and this act shall take effect and be in force from and after its 
passage. 

Approved, October 3L 1890. 

W. N. Jones. 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 



24 ENROLLMENT IN TliE EIVE CIVILIZED THIBES. 

No. 43. 

An iict recognizing the citizenship of Willis Jackson and his family. 

Br it enacted by the General Council of the Choctaw Xation asfiemhlcd. That 
Willis Jackson, his wife. Mary Jackson, and their children, Minnie, Sam. B'olsom, 
Laura, and Edmond Jackson, late of the State of Mississippi, are hereby rec- 
ognized and declared to be citizens of this nation and entitled to all the rights, 
privileges, and immunities of other citizens of this nation, and this act shall take 
effect and be in force from and after its passage. 
Ai)proved, November 13, 1890. 

W. N. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

No. 44. 

An acl making- appropriallou for the i-.lU'i of Matt Sakki et al. 

Be it enacted bij the General Cotincil of the Choctaw Nation assembled. That 
the sum of seventy-five dollars is hereby a])propriated, out of any money in the 
treasury not otherwise appropriated, fur the purpose of aiding Matt Sakki. 
Isaac Simsin, and Tom Yark, lately arrived from Mississippi, and to enable 
them to pay their board and traveling expenses while attending the general 
council for the purpose of having themselves recognized as citizens of this 
nation, and this act shall take effect and he in force t'roui and .-ifler its passage. 

Api>ro\ed. Nov. 14, 1890. 

W. N. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaiv Nation. 



LAWS PASSED BY THIi GENERAL COUNCII, OF THE CHOCTAW NATION AT ITS SPECIAT. 
SESSION CONVENED ON APRIF. «TH, I.S'.U. 

No. 2. 

An art for the relief of ceitain Mississippi Choctaws. 

Be it enacted by the General Council of the Choctaw Nation assembled. That 
the sum of two hundred and ninety-five dollars is hereby appropriated, out ol 
any money in the treasury not otherwise appropriated, to reimburse Cornelius 
Hickman and family (4), Presley Isham and family (4). Nat Sakki (1), Dixon 
Ripley (1), Taylor Bell (1), Jane Sakki (1), Lee Nobbee (1), Tom Sakki and 
family (5). James Sakki (1), Alex Sakki (1), Isaac Simpson and family (5), 
and Matt Sakki and family (3), Choctaws (late arrivals from the State of Mis- 
sissippi) for their expenditures while immigrating, and to enable them to 
obtain the necessaries of life, they having arrived too late last year to raise a 
crop of any kind ; and this act shall take effect and be in foi'ce from and after 
its passage. 

Approved, April 4, 1891. 

W. N. Jones, 
Princiiiol Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

No. 8. 
.\n act adiuittius certain Missis.sippl Indians to citizenship. 

He it (nartcil bij the General Cowiril of the Cliovtitw Nation assembled. That 
Mrs. Anna Boyd, Mrs. Lenas Southerland, Mrs. Ozie Travis, Mrs. M. Milliam, 
Chocti'ws lately from the State of Mississippi, and full sister of C. A. Bilbo, 
who has been heretofore admitted, and their descendants be, and they are 
hereby declare<l citizens of the Choctaw Nation. 

Be it further enacted that this act take effect and be in force from and after 
its passage. 

Approved, April 8, 1891. 

W. N. Jones, 
Princiijal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 



p:nrollment in the five civilized tribes. 25 

No. 15. 

An act atiruittiiis I'cilain Choctaws from Mississippi to tltizensbip in the Choctaw Nation. 

lie it enacted hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation assembled, That 
Joe Willis JUKI his children, Nancy Selau, and Frank Willis and his sister 
Liuey Willis, and Billy Willis and his children Lee and Serena Willis, Thomson 
Barnett. James Saklvi, and Thomas Sakki, and Wallace Sam and his wife Fannie 
Sam and their children Milley, Jeruzy, Luke, Silley, Lizzie, Liza, and Era Sam, 
all having just come from the old nation in Mississippi, are hereby admitted to 
all of the rights and privileges of citizenship in the Choctaw Nation, and this 
act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage. 

Approved. April 8. 1891. 

W. N. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

No. 16. 

An r.ct vecosnizinK the citizenship of certain Mississippi Choctaws. 

Be it enacted hj/ the General Council of the Choctaw Nation assenihled. That 
following Mississippi Choctaws, late arrival, to wit: 1. Cornelius Hickman; 
2, Eliza Ann Hickman; 3, Jeff Hickman; 4, Presley Isham ; 5, Ellen Isham; 
6, William Isham; 7, Nat Sakki; S, Dixon Ripley; 9, Taylor Bell; 10, Alex 
Sakki; 11. Jane Sakki; 12, Lee Nobbe; 13. Ilenson Hnlteustyle; 14, Phoebe Ilal- 
tenstyle: 15. Milton Haltenstyle; H!. Jesse Haltenstyle; 17, Fall Haltenstyle, 
are hereby recognized as citizens of this nation and are entitled to all the 
rights and privileges tnid immunities of other citizens of this nation; and ttiis 
act take effect and be in fm-ce from and after its passage. 

Approved. April 9. 1891. 

W. N. Jones. 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

No. 17. 

Aii act for flie relief of certain Mississippi Choctaws. 

Be it enacted hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation assembled. That 
the sum of $300 be. and the same is hereby, appropriated out of any money in 
the treasury not otherwise appropriated, as a relief for the following late 
arrivals from ISIississippi, to wit: 1, Joe Willis; 2, Nancy Willis; 3, Frank 
Willis; 4, Liney Willis; 5, Billy Willis; 6, Liza Willis; 7, Serena Willis; 8, 
Thompson Burney ; 9, Wallace Sam; 10, Fannie Sam; 11. Jenzy Sam; 12, 
Luke Sam; 13, Sally Sam; 14, Liza Sam; 15, Lizzie Sam; 16, Asa Sam; 17, 
Henson Haltenstyle; 18, Phoebe Haltenstyle; 19, Milton Haltenstyle; 20. Jesse 
Haltenstyle; 21, Fall Haltenstyle; 22, Sanders Amos; 23, William Amos; 24, 
Ann Amos: 25, John Amos; 26, Solomon Amos; 27, Puss Amos; 28. Casson 
Wilson; 29, Belson Wilson; 30, Medarial Wilson; and this act to take effect and 
he in force from and after its passage. 

Approved. April 9, 1891. 

W. N. Jones, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 



LAWS PASSED nv Tin; CENERAI, COUNCIL OF THE CHOCTAW NATION AT ITS KEGUI.AR 
SESSION CONVENED IN OCTOBER, 1801. 

No. 14. 

Au aft for the relief of twenty-six Choctaws lately from Mississsisippi. 

Be it cnartcd by thc'Ceneral Council of the Choctaiv Nation assembled. 
Section 1. That the sum of two hundriHl and sixty dollars is hereby appro- 
priated for the relief of James I'hillips and twenly-five others, whose names 
are hereto attaclml ; that the national auditor shall issue his warrant on the 
treasurer and he shall pay the same. 

Sec. 2. That this act take effect and l)e in force from .ind after its passage. 

Approved, October 2L 1891. ^^ , 

^*^ W. N. Jones, 

Principal Chief of the Ctioctaw Nation. 



26 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

No. 27. 

An act conferring citizenship on Henry Lewis, Mississippi Choctaw. 

Be it enacted hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation asscmhlcd, Tii.it 
one Henry Lewis. Inte of tlie State of Mississippi, is lxerel)y recognized as a 
citizen of tliis nation, and entitled to all tlie riglits, privileges, and inununities 
of a citizen of this nation, and this act shall take effect and be in force from 
and after its passage. 
Approved, October 27, 1891. 

W. N. Jones, 
Piinniuil Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

No. 13. 

An act in relation to the appointing commissioliers to remove tJie Choctaws from the 

State of Mississippi. 

Section 1. Be it enacted hy the General Council of tlie Clioctair Nation 
assembled. That there is herel)y appropriated, ont of any money in the n;itional 
treasury not otherwise appropriated, and placed in the hands of commissioaers 
(to be appointed by the principal chief), the sum of seventeen hundred and 
ninety-two dollars and fifty cents ($1,792.50) upon the certificate of the prin 
cipal chief to the national .auditor, then the auditor shall issue his warrant to 
the national treasurer, and the national treasurer shall i)ay the s:!nie for the 
purpose of paying the expen.ses of the following-named Choctaws who imw ro- 
Bide in the State of Mississippi; that is, 

Wesley Williams and 6 in family. Rufus York and 6 in family. Charley York 
and 5 in family, Tom l^ork and 2 in family, Sampson York ;ind 3 in family. 
Dixon York and 6 in family. Scott Burnie and 3 in family, Robert Anderson 
and 4 in family. Edmond Martin and 3 in family, Ben Sakke and 3 in family, 
John Sakke and 5 in family, William Cultie and 5 in family, Martin Worlark 
and 8 in family, Dixon Willis and 4 in family, Tom Cheto and 11 in family, Tom 
Davis and 7 in family, James Battiest and 1 in family, Davis Welch and 4 in 
family, Sakkee Susan and 7 in family, Sis Simm and 3 in family. Jack Columbus 
and 2 in family, Thomas Benton and 3 in family, Willie and 4 in family. W. E. 
Martin and 4 in family, .Toe Yale and 3 in family, Billy Gipson and 1 in family, 
Thompson Baker and 1 in family, making in all one hundred and fourteen 
persons. 

Skc. 2. Be it further enacted. That the principal chief shall appoint two com- 
missioners, who shall proceed at once to the State of Mississippi, collect up said 
Choctaws, and bring them to this nation. Said commissioners to be appointed 
and commissioned by the principal chief and to take the required oath of office 
before any judge of a court of record of this nation, and to give bond, payable 
to the principal chief, to be approved by the said .iudge, in the sum of sev- 
enteen hundred and ninety-two dollars and fifty cents (1,792.50) for the faith- 
ful performance of their duties, and that the sum of eight hundred dollars 
(800) is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the national treasury not 
otherwise appropriated, to said commissioners, and upon presenting their com- 
mission to the national auditor he shall draw his warrant on the treasury for 
the sum of eight hundred dollars in favor of said commissioners, and the 
national treasurer shall pay the same. 

Sec. 3. Be it further enacted. That the said eight hundred dollars ($800)-— 
that is. $400 each to said commissioners — shall be in full compensation for their 
service as such commissioner. 

Sec. 4. lie it further enacted. That said commissioners shall make a full re- 
port of their actions to the next general council at its next regular term in 
Oct 1892, and to return any balance of money on hand to the national treas- 
urer; and this act shall take effect and be in force from and after its passage. 

Approved October 20, 1891. 

J.'H. Bryant. 
Acting Principal Chief o' the Choctaw Nation 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 2T 

laws ok the genkral council of the choctaw nation passed at its regular 
session in the years 1895 and 189c. 

Bill No. 2. 

Resolution in regard to citizenship cases. 

Section 1. He it resolved hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation as- 
sembled. That all parties who claim citizenship to the Choctaw Nation, and 
intend proving the same, are hereby notified that they must file their petitions, 
as the law directs, cm or before November 35th. 1895, as after said date no peti- 
tions will be entertained by the Choctaw Nation, and all parties who have their 
jietitions filed are hereby notified that they must come forward and prosecute 
the same at once. - — 

Sec 2. Be it further resolved. That the national secretary is hereby requested / 
to have this resolution printed in all the principal papers in the Choctaw aniT 
Chickasaw Nations, and that the sheriff's of each county are hereby notified to 
post this resolution in conspicuous places in their respective comities. 

Approved, October 16, A. D. 1895. 

Jeff Gardner. 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

Bill No. 5. ^^ 

An net recognizing the citizenship of certain Mississippi Choctaws. 

lie it enacted hy the General Council of the Choctaw Nation asscnihled. TJiaC 
the following ;\Iississippi Choctaws, late arrivals, to wit, Wm. Child, Mary 
Child, Martin Child, and Emil Child, Lester Jackson. Wilson Jackson, George 
.Jackson, Joe Lewis, Amy Jackson, are hereby recognized as citizens of this 
nation, and are entitled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of othei 
citizens of this nation; and this act take effect and be in force from and after 
its passage. 

Approved, October 16, 1895. 

Jeff Gardner. 
Principal Chief of the Choctaiv Nation, 

Bill No. 22. 

.\n .'let admitting certain Choctaws from Louisiana to citizenship. 

Section 1. lie it enacted by the General Council of the Choctaiv Nation as- 
sembled. That Jim Jackson, Emma Jackson, William Murphy, Martin Jackson, 
Fannie Jackson, Mary Jackson, Jim Jackson, jr., Sophy Jackson. Frank Jack- 
son, Bankston Johnson, and John Dorsett are hereby admitted to all the rights 
and privileges of citizenship in the Choctaw Nation, and that this act shall take 
effect and be in force from and after its passage. 

Approved, October 28, 1895. 

Jeff Gardner, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

Bill No. 36. 
.\n act admitting certain Choctaws from Mississippi to citizenship in the Choctaw Nation. 

lie it enacted by the General Council of the Choctaw Nation assembled. That 
Siirah Whittle and her children, to wit. Arcolah Whittle, age 22; Najtoleon 
Whittle, age 18; (^arrie Whittle, age 16; John Whittle, age 14; Arthur Whittle, 
age 11; Alma Whittle, age 7; Mtidge Lamar AVbittle, age 5: and Clarence 
Whittle, age 3, tire hereby admitted to all the rights, privileges, and immunities 
of citizenship in the Choctaw Nation, and this act take effect and be in force 
from and after its passage. 

Ai)[)rov(Ml, November 5, 1895. 

Jeff Gardner. 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 



28 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Birx No. 38. 

.\n act admitting Betty A. Lewis .and olliers. 

Section.]. Be it enacted by the General Council of the Choctaw Nation as- 
sembled, That Betty A. Lewis and her children, to wit, Frank Lewis, age 16 ; 
Bettie Lewis, age 14 ; May Lewis, age 10 ; Annie, age 8 ; Cora, age 6 years ; 
Curtis, age 4 years; Alice, age 2 years; Winnie, age 6 months, are hereby 
admitted to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of other Choctaws, and 
this act take effect and be in force from and after its passage. 
Approved, November 6, 1895. 

Jeff Gardner, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

Bill No. 43. 

An act admitting IJilly Baker and other Mississii)])! Indians to citizenslilp. 

Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Council of the Choctaw Nation as- 
sembled. That Billy Baker, his children, Oscar Bakei*, age 15 years; Annie 
Baker, age 10 years: Sally Baker, age 7 years; and Solomon John, age 22 years; 
Susan John, age 39 years; Sis^ John, age 13 years; and Hickman Lewis, age 
27, all late arrivals from Mississippi, be. and they are hereby, admitted to all 
the rights and privileges in said nation of other Choctaws. 

Sec. 2. Be it further enacted. That this act take effect and be in force from 
and after its passage. 

Ajiproved, November 8, 1895. 

Jeff Gardner, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

Bill No. 44. 

An act admitting Louis Traheon and liis cliildren to citizenship. 

Section L Be it enacted by the General Council of the Choctaw Nation as- 
sembled, That Louis Traheon and his children, Willie May Traheon, age 2 
years; F. Traheon, age 6 months, be admitted to all the inghts, privileges, and 
immunities with other Choctaws, and that this act take effect and be in force 
from and after its passage. 

Ajiproved, November 9. 1S95- 

Jkff Gardner, 
^ Principal Chief of the Choctaic Nation. 

Bill No. 52. 

.\n acl admitting Mattie Baggett and children. 

Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Council of the Choctaw Nation as- 
sembled, That Mattie Baggett and her children, Willie Baggett, age 5; Gracy 
Baggett. age G; and Ida Jane Baggett, age 9 months, be admitted to the rights 
and privileges of citizenship of other Choctaws, and that this act take effect and 
be in force from jiud after its passage. 
Approved, November 31, 1895. 

Jeff Gardner, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

Since Mr. Harrison has left the room. T wouUl rather not proceed 
further in discussing the argument he made on the question. I was 
discussing the very question that Mr. Ballinger raised; the question 
"was also raised hy Mr. Harrison, and I Avould like to discuss that in 
the presence of Mr. Harrison, so that he can reply. 

Mr. Richardson. I have some questions I should like to ask you, 
if vou will answer those now. 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE xlVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 29 

Mr. Hurley. I shall be glad to answer your questions wliilo we 
are waiting for Mr. Harrison. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Hurley, you referred in your opening state- 
ment to the fact in four different instances of four different tri!)unals 
deciding this very question that the committee is now asked to pass 
(■n. I w^ant to ask you about that. The first two were the decisions 
of the Dawes Commission and the United States district court, under 
the act of June 10, 1896? 

Mr. PIuRLEY. Yes, sir. 

Mr. EicHARDSON. Is it not a fact that the <]i!estion at issue Itcfore 
the Dawes Commission under that act and before the United States 
court on appeal from its decision w-as purely the question of whether 
the ChoctaAvs then living in Mississippi were entitled to be placed on 
the citizenship roll, and that those decisions did not consider the 
question of whether those Chcctaws. although not on the citizenship 
roll, were entitled to some interest in the Choctaw estate ? 

Mr. Hurley. Is it not a fact, Mr. Richardson, that you are asking 
this committee here now to determine the question as to whether or 
not the Mississippi Choctaw.s are entitled to enrollment in the 
Ghoctaw' Nation? 

Mr. RiciiARDsox. I do not so consider it. 

Mr. Hurley. What are you asking the committee to decide i 

Mr. Richardson. I am asking the committee to decide whether 
the Mississippi Choctaws, under their treaty and under subsequent 
laws, are not entitled to be compensated for the loss of their interest 
in the Choctaw property. 

Mr. Hurley. Are you asking this committee to decide whether or 
not the Choctaw Indians in Mississippi have a right to compensalion 
out of the lands sold in Mississippi? 

Mr. Richardson. No. 

Mr, Hurley. Are you not asking for citizenship in the 

Mr. Richardson (interposing). I misunderstood your question. 
I am asking them to determine that these Mississippi Choctaws are 
entitled to share in the Choctaw property west. 

Mr. PTuRLEY. That is the very question that Congress asked the 
commission to determine in 1896 and subsequent acts, and which has 
been fully considered and finally determined. 

Mr. Post. Would that not, Mr. Richardson, involve the i-ight to 
the enrollment? 

Mr. Richardson. Not directly, Mr. Post. If I might explain to 
you and counsel for the nation, you will see exactly my position 
from that. Our position has been this: That in the decision of 
the Jack Amos case and the appeals to the United States court, 
and in that and in the E. J. Horn case and other cases of Mississippi 
Choctaws under the act of 1896, the Dawes Commissi(m held this. 
and it was affii-med by the court, that the Choctaws who pi-oved their 
identity under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830 were not 
entitled to be placed on the rolls of citizenship while they lived in 
Mississippi. They held that as a matter of right, without regard to 
any resolution of the Choctaw Nation closing the rolls or any other 
collateral facts, as a matter of right those Choctaws who had re- 
moved prior to the filing of their ai)plication under the act of 1896 



50 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

were entitled to be placed on those final citizenship rolls. That is 
the E. J. Horn case, decided by Judge Clayton the same date the 
Jack Amos case was decided. So under that legislation we had this 
situation, that the Mississippi Choctaws, claimants under the four- 
teenth article, who stayed in Mississippi were not entitled to be 
placed on the final citizenship rolls. That the Mississippi Choctaws, 
claimants under that article, Avho might have moved, even after the 
act of 1896 but before filing their application before the 90 days fixed 
by that act, were entitled to be placed on those final citizenship rolls. 
Therefore the right under the Amos and Horn decisions put cases of 
place of residence at the time of filing application. The Jack Amos 
case was finally decided by the commission in November, 1896, and 
the E. J. Horn case was also decided by Judge Clayton in the spring 
of 1897, and those decisions immediately resulted in the passage by 
Congress of the resolution or act of June, 1897, directing the Dawes 
Commission to report whether or not the Mississippi Choctaws under 
their treaties, etc., have rights in the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Hurley. I yielded for a question. Mr. Richardson is making 
an argument. 

Mr. Richardson. I want to have Mr. Hurley center on the point 
in issue, and I think this is the point in issue at this time. 

Mr. Hurley. Did you not present your case when you were before 
the committee? 

Mr. Richardson. I did not seem to do it effectively, because you 
asked me a question Avhich seemed to indicate you overlooked that 
part of my argument. 

Mr. Hurley. In the E. J. Horn case, to which you refer, the par- 
ties who made the application in that case were residents of the 
Choctaw Nation and were enrolled as citizens of the nation. 

Mr. Richardson. They were residents at the time they filed their 
application. 

Mr. Hurley. And were enrolled afterwards as citizens. 

Mr. Richardson. Were enrolled by that decision as citizens. 

Mr. Hurley. I say, they became residents before they were en- 
rolled? 

Mr. Richardson. That is just exactly what I said. 

Mr. Hurley'. The Jack Amos people made application as non- 
residents, and were denied enrollment. All of them who afterwards 
removed to the Indian Territory were finally enrolled as citizens 
after they became residents of the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Richardson. No; that was not so. Jack Amos never lias been 
enrolled. 

Mr. Hurley. Is not a case pending now in the Court of Claims to 
collect the fee from Jack Amos and others for services rendered in 
procuring their enrollment? 

Mr. Richardson. I mean to say this, Mr. Hu.rley: That Senator 
Owen, who started that suit, took this name on the list of his clients 
with whom he had contracts, and the first name was the name of 
Jack Amos. It so hap]:)ened that, although Jack Amos was one of the 
claimants, that he failed to remo\e from Mississippi, and therefore 
never was enrolled, so he is not a member of the Choctaw Nation at 
this time. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 31 

Mr. Hurley. Let me ask you, were not all the Indians in the Jack 
Amos case who removed to and established a residence in the Choc- 
taw Nation enrolled as citizens? 

Mr. Richardson. They were enrolled under the act 

Mr. Hurley (interposing). That is what I asked you in the first 
place — if all those people involved in that case as nonresidents, who 
afterwards became residents of the Choctaw Nation, were not en- 
rolled as citizens? 

Mr. PJiCHARDSOx. That is approximately correct. I do not think 
it has any bearing on this proposition, however. 

Mr. Hurley. It is just the thing you were trying to explain. I 
made the statement there was never a person enrolled by the Choc- 
taw or Chickasaw Nations, or by the United States Government for 
them- as a citizen of either of those tribes while that person was a 
nonresident of the tribe. Now you ask that we recognize your clients 
as citizens in Mississippi as nonresident citizens and send to them 
money from the Choctaw Nation 

Mr. Carter. Did you say the Jack Amos case was tried in 1896? 

Mr. EicHARDsoK. It was tried by the Dawes Commission in 1896. 

Mr. Carter. I thought it was later— probably 1897? 

Mr. Richardson. No; it was decided by the United States court 
in the spring of 1897 — I think in April or May, 1897. 

Mr. Post. Your position, if I understood you, originally was 
that these Mississippi Choctaws have a vested interest? 

Mr. Richardson. I used the term " vested interest" in a loose way. 
They have a right to participate in the property of the Choctaw 
Nation which Congress is charged with the duty of distributing. 

Mr. Post. Notwithstanding the provision of the fourteenth article 
that removal is necessary? 

Mr. Richardson. I do not regard the provision of that article as 
providing that the removal is necessary, and I will say this, that 
granting that removal is necessary, if Congress should administer 
an estate as to which persons have a contingent interest which may 
vest in their own act, to wit, the act of removal, that it is the duty 
of Congress to settle and satisfy that contingent interest, because they 
are contingent oAvners of real estate. 

Mr. Carter. Jack Amos never did remove to Oklahoma; he is 
still in Mississippi? 

Mr. Richardson. He is still in Mississippi. 

Mr. Carter. And never enrolled? 

Mr. Richardson. Never enrolled. As a matter of fact, Jack Amos 
is a mixed blood, not a full blood, and he failed of identification. 

Mr. Post. I want to hear Mr. Hurley on two propositions. First, 
what steps were taken in the distribution of scrip ; what was the pur- 
pose of issuing that scrip, and what was the purpose of withholding 
half of it? As to whom it was distributed; how it was distributed. 
And then I want to hear him on this proposition: What was the dis- 
position of judgment that the Choctaw^ Nation recovered against the 
United States in the case oi the Choctaw Nation against the United 
States; Avho got that money, where it went to, and w^hy it was dis- 
tributed as it was? I should like to hear you on those two questions. 

Mr. Carter. We will do that this afternoon. 

(Recess until 2 o'clock p. m.) 



32 ' ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TBIBES, 

AFTER RECESS. 

The subcommittee reassembled at the expiratioii of the recess. 
Mr. C.vRTER. You may proceed, Mr. Hurle.y. 

STATEMENT OF MR. P. J. HURLEY— Continued. 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Chairman, when we discontinued for recess we 
were discussing article 41 of the employment agreement of July 1, 
1002, between the Choe(a\vs and Cliiekasnws and the United States. 

In discussing this provision, Mr. Harrison inakes the following 
statement : 

That act of Cougress said that no person should be enrolled whose ancestor 
had not received a patent from the Federal Government. 

And, niarlv you, because of the acts of this man Ward, the agent of the 
(rovernment in 1S31. there were only 14.3 patents issued to the ^Mississippi 
Choctaws under the fourteenth article. 

Notwithstanding the fact that over 4,000 Mississippi Choctaws were entitled 
to patent and only 14.3 actually received them, this act provides that in order 
to be enrolled their ancestors are required to have actually received a patent. 
Is that fair, just, or right? 

The commissioner in 1832 reported the case of 1,372 Mississippi Choctaws 
who hiid nctnally signified their intention to remain in Mississippi under the 
fourteenth article and had complied with the iirovisions of that article; and 
the evidence in \';u'ious hearings afterv^'ards showed that 4,144 of these people 
received scrip, and the scrip was issued in 1842 only to those who had remained 
in Mississippi after 1S.30 and signified their intention of taking up these lands 
in Mississ!p))i under that article of the treaty. Yet. under this MeMurray Act of 
1902 Ihose who desired enrollment must prove tliat their ancestors actually 
received a patent. If they confine it to that, it coul;l only benefit the descend- 
jiuts of 143 people, when it is undisputed that 7.000 of them li^ed in Mississiiipi 
in 1842. But that is not all. The act goes further and says that, notwithstand- 
ing the fact that the descendants of these people could prove that their ancestors 
actually received a pa, tent, that they must not remain in Mississippi ;ind acquire 
the rights guaranteed to them by Article XIV of the treaty of 18.30, but they 
must move into Indian Territory. 

T ask now that, after that statement of Mr. Harrison's, article -11 
of the treaty be quoted. 

(The matter referred to is as follows:) 

Art. 41. All persons duly identified by the Commission to the Five Civilized 
Tribes under the provisions of section 21 of the act of Congress ajiproved June 
28. ISOS (30 Slat., 40.''>) as Mississippi Choctaws entitled to benefits under arti- 
cle 14 of the treaty between the United States and the Choctaw Nation con- 
cluded September 27, 18.30, may at any time within six months after the date 
of their identification as Mississippi Choctaws by the said commission, make 
bona fide settlement within the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, and upon proof 
of such settlement to such commission within one year after the date of the said 
identification as Mississipjii Choctaws shall be enrolled by such commission as 
Mississippi Choctaws entitled to allotment as herein provided for citizens of the 
tribes, subject to special jjrovislons herein provided as to Mississippi Choctaws, 
and said enrollment shall be final when approved by the Secretary of the In- 
terior. The application of no person for identification as a Mississippi Choc- 
taw shall be received by said commission after six months subsequent to the 
date of the final ratification of this agreement, and in the disposition of such 
application all fulM)lood Mississippi Choctaw Indians and the descendants 
of any Mississippi Choctaw Indians, whether of full or mixed blood, who re- 
ceive a patent to land under the said fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830, 
who had not moved to and made bona fide settlement in the Choctaw-Chicka- 
saw country prior to ,Tune 28, 1898, shall be deemed to be Mississip])! Choctaws 
entitled to 'benefits inider article 14 of the said treaty of September 27. 1830. 
and to identification as such by said comnu8.sion, but this direction or provi- 
sion shall be deemed to be only a rule of evidence and shall not be invoked by 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 33 

or operate to the advantage of auy applicaut who is not a Mississippi Choctaw 
of the full blood, or who is not the descendant of a Mississippi Choctaw who 
received a patent to land under said treaty, or who is otherwise barred from 
the rights of citizenship in the Choctaw Nation. All of said Mississippi Choc- 
taws so enrolled by said commission shall be upon a separate roll. 

To show that Mr. Harrison's statement about the operation of that 
law is entirely incorrect, I will now read the decision in the so-called 
Jim Gift case, which was rendered on November 23, 1904. The de- 
cision appears at page 42 of the brief which we have heretofore sub- 
mitted to this committee, and is as follows : 

novembee 23, 1904. 
Commission to tuk Five Civilized Tribes, 

Muskogee, Ind. T. 

Gentlemen: The department is in receipt of your report of June 3, 1904, 
resubmitting the record in the matter of the application of Jim Gift, M. C. R. 
1659. et al.. for identification as Mississippi Choctaws, rendered in compliance 
with departmental letters of February 25, 1903, and February 19, 1904. 

From the testimony furnished by the witnesses in this case it appears that 
Jim Gift, the principal applicant, through whom the others claim, was born in 
Sumter County, Ala., a few years prior to the treaty of September 27, 1830. 
He is of mixed Choctaw and negro blood. His mother was a Choctaw woman 
named I^ucy, who in early life lived in Greene County, Ala. From there she 
removed to Sumter County, Ala., where the principal applicant was born, and 
thence westward to Kemper County, Miss. In the latter county the principal 
applicant lived until he became an old man. He has lived near Lockhart, 
Lauderdale County, which is the county south of Kemper County, for the last 
12 or 15 years. 

It appears from tlie records of the Indian Office that in 1S31 an application 
was made by a Cboct;iw woman named Lucy for the benefits of article 14 of the 
treaty of September 27, 1S30. This application was made at the "old factory" 
in Sumter County, Ala., which was situated within a few miles of her residence, 
on behalf of herself and her children. No record was kept of her application, 
and subsequently she presented an application in 1S43 to the commissioners 
acting under the act of Congress of August 23, 1842 (5 Stats.. 513). As a 
re.'^ult of this application, scrip was issued to Lucy r.ud to her children, among 
whom was a child named Jimmy, who was under 10 years of age when the 
treaty was made. 

Out of the facts enumerated two questions arise: First, is the testimony 
sufficient to identify the applicant and his mother Lucy with the Jimmy and 
Lucy of record to whom scrip was issued, and, second, is the issuance of scrip 
under the act referred to sufficient evidence that the recipients of same com- 
plied or attempted to comply, in person or otherwise, with the provisions of 
article 14 of the treaty of September 2, 1830? 

From your record of June 3, 1904, and decision of October 10, 1902, it appears 
that you are of the opinion that the testimony of Jim Gift is unreliable and 
that the testimony is accordingly insufficient to identify the applicant as the 
scripee of record. 

Respecting the point of law involved, it further appears that you are of the 
opinion that section 41 of the act of July, 1902 (32 Stats., 641), contains no 
express provision authorizing the identification of scripees and their descend- 
ants. You are, however, for the reasons stated by you, of the opinion that said 
{section does not operate in any respect to prevent the identification of persons 
as Mississippi Choctaws who were entitled to identification as such prior to said 
act, and that scripees and their descendants, where the facts are sufficient to 
warrant the same, are still entitled to identification. 

The Commissioner of Indian Affairs, in his report of December 16, 1902, and 
the acting commissioner, in his report of November 2, 1904, are of the opinion 
that the testimony is sufficient to establish that Jim Gift and his mother Lucy 
are the identical Jimmy and Lucy to whom scrip was issued. The acting com- 
missioner sets forth at considerable length his reasons for believing that the 
testimony of Jim Gift is reliable, and could not possibly be a fabrication.- In 
respect to the point of law involved, the acting commissioner is also of the 
opinion that persons entitled to identificaton before the act of July 1, 1902, 
supra, were not, by virtue of that act, barred from identification. He is of the 

88855—15 3 



34 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

opinion, however, that spotion 41 thereof is in itself sufficient authority for the 
identification of scripees and their descendants as Mississippi Choctaws. 
Whether the acting commissioner's view as to section 41 is correct or not, the 
result of this case will be the same. 

The department has compared the testimony furnished by the applicants 
and their witnesses with the information furnished by the Indian Office, and 
is satisfied that if the testimony is to be accepted as reliable it is sufficient 
to establish the conclusions of the Indian Office as to the questions of fact 
involved. The testimony connected with the parentage of Jim Gift showing his 
mixture of African and Choctaw blood, his mother's name and her various 
residences, her appearance before the Indian agent at " Yazoo " city, the date of 
her death, Jim Gift's place of birth, and his various places of residence, the 
testimony concerning his twin sister and the name of his other relatives, agrees 
substantially in so many respects with the testimony of a like character rela- 
tive to the Jimmy and T.ucy of record and the various members of the family 
to which they belonged, that the identity of Jim Gift with said Jimmy of record 
can not be reasonably questioned. 

There remains to be considered the question of law involved relative to the 
rights of scripees and their descendants. Concerning said section 41 of the act 
of July 1, 1902, the Attorney General of the United States, in an opinion ren- 
dered June 19. 1903, used the following language : 

" This agreement must, of course, be construed in the light of the circum- 
stances under which it was made, and with a purpose to ascertain the intention 
of the parties thereto. Manifestly the parties did not intend to abridge the 
rights of any person theretofore entitled by law to identification as a Mississippi 
Choctaw, but they did intend to permit the identification of some persons who 
had not prior to that time been able to bring themselves within the requirements 
of the rules established by the commission — persons the evidence of whose 
rights under the treaty of 1830 could not be secured, but whom the Government 
of the United States and the Choctaw Indians, ' in their generosity,' desired 
should share in the benefits arising out of the provisions of that treaty. * * * 

" In my opinion, i)aragraph 41 of the agreement of 21st March, 1902, does 
not require the identification of part-blood children of Mississippi Choctaws 
themselves identified solely by reason of full blood. Such children must in 
some other way, if possible, establish their claims to participate in the benefits 
arising from the treaty of 1830. They have not been deprived by the agreement 
of anything to which they were entitled before its conclusion." 

From this opinion it seems clear that if the descendants of scripees were 
entitled to identification as Mississippi Choctaws prior to the ratification of 
the Choctaw-Chickasaw agreement, they are not now barred from such identi- 
fication. The rule in force prior to the ratification of said agreement per- 
mitted the identification of applicants whose ancestors complied or attempted 
to comply, in person or by proxy, with article 14 of the treaty of September 27, 
1830. It is therefore necessary to determine whether scripees and the de- 
scendants of scripees come within this rule. Article 14 of the treay of 1830 
stcitcs ' 

" Each Choctaw head of a family being desirous to remain and become a 
citizen of the States shall be permitted to do so by signifying his intention to 
the agent within six months from the ratification of this treaty, and he or she 
shall thereupon be entitled to a reservation of one section of 640 acres of land, 
to be bonnded by sectional lines of survey; in like manner shall be entitled 
to one-half that quantity for each unmarried child which is living with him 
over 10 years of age, and a quarter section to such child as may be under 10 
years of age. to adjoin the location of the parent. If they reside upon said 
lands, intending to become citizens of the States, for five years after the rati- 
fication of this'^ treaty in that case a grant in fee simple shall issue; said res- 
ervation shall include the present improvement of the head of the family or a 
portion of it. Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege 
of a Choctaw citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any 
portion of the Choctaw annuity." 

Owing to the failure of the Government to furnish an agent promptly upon 
the ratification of the treaty, and for the further reason that said agent, after 
entering upon his duties, was derelict in his performance of the same and re- 
fused to enroll many who applied for the benefits of the treaty, only a mere 
handful of the persons entitled to such benefits were enrolled. To adjust and 
settle the land claims arising under this article Congress subsequently provided 
commissions to adjudicate all such claims, and in the act of August 23, 1842, 
supra, the commission was specifically instructed in section 3 thereof as to the 



lONROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 35 

requisites constituting sufficient compliance with article 14 of said treaty to 
entitle tbose complying therewith to lands guaranteed by it. W^here applicants 
established to the satisfaction of the commissioners and the Secretary of War 
that they had complied with the requisites specifically enumerated in said sec- 
tion 3, patents were to be issued to them covering in whole or in part improve- 
ments made by them at the date of the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek. In 
cases where it appeared that applicants had done everything within their power 
to comply with the treaty, but had failed to maintain continuous residence for 
five years after the ratification of the treaty upon the lands claimed by them, 
such failure being due to the fact that the Government had before the expiration 
of the five-year period patented said lands to others, a substitute arrangement 
was made whereby their claims were to be settled by the issuance of certificates 
entitling them to select an equal amount of public land in the United States 
open to selection in the States of Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, and Arkansas, 
the acceptance of such certificates by the applicants to operate as "a full satis- 
faction and discharge " of their claims against the United States to land under 
article 14 of the treaty of 1830. 

It will thus be seen that patentees and scripees stood on exactly the same 
footing, so far as the merits of their cases were concerned, but the latter were 
compelled to accept as the fruits of their compliance with the treaty a substi- 
tuted performance on the part of the Government, by which they received other 
lands than those which they were promised by the treaty. Can it be held that 
this substituted performance proposed by the Government as a settlement of the 
land claims of fourteenth-article applicants and accepted by them in full satis- 
faction of such claims, operates in any respect to alter their claims against the 
Choctaw Nation to a portion of its lauds west of the Mississippi, claims founded 
upon the guaranty in said article 14 that " persons who claim under this article 
shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw citizen"? The department does not 
so consider. The only relation existing between patents and scrip and land 
rights in the Choctaw Nation is this : So far as the rights of fourteenth-article 
claimants to Choctaw lands west of the Mississippi is concerned patents and 
scrip serve only as evidence that the persons to whom they were issued elected 
for themselves and for persons claiming through them, not to relinquish their 
rights as Choctaw citizens, except to the annuities. Other than this the action 
of the United States in adjudicating the claims of these people against it for 
lands under article 14 has nothing whatever to do with their claims against the 
Choctaw Nation for a share of its lands lying west of the Mississippi. 

The department is therefore of the opinion that scripees and their descend- 
ants come within the I'ule referred to above as being persons or descendants of 
persons who attempted to comply with article 14 of the treaty of Septembr 27, 
1830. In this connection it should be noted that it is not the intention of the 
department to hold that this is the only form of attempted compliance which 
can be recognized, or that other forms of attempted compliance will be recog- 
nized. Other cases of attempted compliance must be determined as presented. 

You are accordingly directed, in accordance with the recommendation of the 
Indian Office, to identify these applicants as Mississippi Choctaws, and to so 
advise them and their attorneys. In so doing you are requested to inform 
them respecting the time limit within which they are required to remove to the 
Choctaw Nation after receiving notice from you. 

A copy of the acting commissioner's letter of November 2, 1904, is inclosed 
herewith. 

Respectfully, 

Thos. Ryan, Acting Secretary. 

The fact is, Mr. Chairman, that the provision in the act of 1902, 
which Mr. Harrison says barred all except those who could prove that 
they were descendants of the 143 patentees, all full bloods residing 
in Mississippi who would remove to the Choctaw Nation were given 
enrollment without being required to prove their right to enrollment 
under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830. 

The Jim Gift case, which I have just read, held that all those who 
could prove their descent from a patentee — and there were 143 heads 
of families, or 276 persons in all, who received patents — or who could 
prove their descent from a scrinec. and there were 1,155 heads of 



36 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

families, or 3,885 persons, who received scrip, making a total of 4,101 
persons who received patents or scrip — the descendants of anv one 
of those 4,161 persons Avho could prove that their ancestor was a 
scripee or patentee, such descendant was entitled to enrollment under 
the law by which Mr. Harrison said they were barred. 

It is very obvious that a statement made on the floor of the House 
to the effect that no one except the descendants of those 143 heads of 
families who received patents could be enrolled is unfair. As a mat- 
ter of fact, no person who could prove descent from either a scripee 
or patentee or any other fourteenth-article claimant was excluded 
by the act of July, 1902. This law which Mr. Harrison so severely 
criticizes gave every mixed-blood Choctaw Indian residing in Missis- 
sippi or elsewhere a right to enrollment if he could prove his right 
as a descendant of any fourteenth-article claimant. The act also 
established the so-called full-blood rule of evidence, which rule oper- 
ated so as to give enrollment in the Choctaw Nation to any full-blood 
Mississippi Choctaw who would remove to the Choctaw^ Nation with- 
out requiring such full blood to prove his descent from any person 
who reserved the right under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 
1830. As I have already shown, the rights of citizenship given to 
full-blood Mississippi Choctaws under this provision were given as 
a gratuity. It was shown that they were unable to prove their right 
to enrollment. 

In his argument Mr. Harrison also contends that the firm of Mans- 
field, McMurray & Cornish received a percentage fee from the Choc- 
taw and Chickasaw Nations for the number of Mississippi Choctaws 
whose names they had stricken from the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
rolls. He also states that one of the blackest pages in the history of 
these citizenship matters is the proceedings of the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw citizenship court and di-aws the conclusion that by reason 
of the conduct of Mansfield, McMurray & Cornish and the action 
of the citizenship court the unfortunate full-blood Mississippi Choc- 
taws were excluded from the Choctaw rolls. This whole attempt to 
connect the Mansfield, McMurray & Cornish fee and the citizenship 
court with the present Mississippi Choctaw claim is misleading. As 
a matter of fact, the names of the present Mississippi Choctaw 
claimants have never been on the Choctaw and Chickasaw citizenship 
rolls. The percentage fee that Mansfield, McMurray & Cornish re- 
ceived was for the number of persons whose names they were able to 
have stricken from the rolls. Whatever their conduct was, it could 
have no effect on the persons for whom Mr. Harrison introduced his 
bill, as their names were never upon the rolls. His attempt to con- 
nect this claim with the citizenship court is also misleading, for the 
citizenship court did not pass on the claims of any of the persons 
whose rights would be affected by Mr. Harrison's bill. 

The names of a great number of persons were stricken from the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw citizenship rolls by the Dawes Commission 
under the act of June 10, 1896. The claimants whose names were 
thus stricken from the rolls appealed to the United States district 
courts. Many of them were readmitted to citizenship by the judg- 
ments of these courts. The citizenship court,- under the authority 
of law by which it was created, reviewed these final judgments of the 
United States courts and set aside a great many of them. It is not 



A 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 37 

necessary for me to go into the ground upon >vhich these judgments 
were set aside, for the reason that these were not Mississippi Choc- 
taw cases. These were the cases of claimants who resided in the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. The people affected by the Har- 
rison bill did not reside in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations and 
do not reside there, so Mr. Harrison's discussion of the conduct of 
Mansfield, INIcMurray & Cornish and his discussion of the conduct 
of the citizenship court are not relevant to this case, and I am of 
the opinion that Crews & Cantwell discuss these matters in their 
brief for the sole purpose of inducing people to believe that there 
was some fraud practiced by which their clients were excluded from 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw rolls. 

Mr. Harrison states positively that no Mississippi Choctaw was 
ever required to remove to the Choctaw Nation to enjoy the 
rights of citizenship in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations until 
after this act and the previous acts of Congress during the making 
of the roll had been passed. In other words, Mr. Harrison states as 
a fact that they had citizenship in the Choctaw Nation while resid- 
ing in Mississippi. The statement is misleading and is incori-ect. 

Neither Mr. Harrison nor the attorneys who have appeared here 
as the proponents of this bill have been unable to show to this com- 
mittee the name of any single person wdio was ever given citizenship 
in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations while a nonresident of those 
nations. 

Mr. Harrison's statement about Mr. McMurray's connection with 
the Mississippi Choctaw matter is entirely misleading for this rea- 
son, that the contract under which Mr. McMurray received a fee 
provided that he should receive a percentage for the number of per- 
sons Avhose names he should be able to strike from the rolls then 
existing. These Mississippi Choctaws' names have never been on 
the rolls. 

Mr. Carter. Well, Mr. Hurley, was it not more specific than that? 
Did it not set out the exact class of persons to be stricken from the 
rolls for which he w^as to receive pay? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Did not Mr. McMurray's contract set out that he was 
to receive pay for having stricken from the rolls the so-called court 
cdtizens, and then afterw^ards define the court citizens as persons who 
had been placed upon the roll by the Federal courts under the juris- 
dictional act of 1896? 

Mr. Harrison. Has that contract been included in the record? 

Mr. Carter. Yes. 

Mr. Harrison. I looked for it and I could not find it in the record. 

Mr. Carter. It is in the Burke hearing. 

Mr. Hurley. The point I am making, Mr. Chairman, is this: The 
brief submitted by CreAvs & Cantwell for the claimants here and the 
arguments made by Mr. Harrison all attack the Mansfield, Mc- 
Murray & Cornish connection with the citizenship cases, and the 
fact is there is not one claimant that the Harrison bill would reach 
whose name has ever been on the rolls of citizenship of the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations. 

Therefore, Mr. McMurray's fee and his attitude towai-d those per- 
sons whose names were stricken from the rolls had absolutely no 



38 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES- 

connection with the claimants whose cases are now being presented 
to this committee; and it is misleading to tell the Congress of the 
United States that these people down in Mississippi were deprived 
of their right of citizenship because of the fact that a firm of at- 
torneys got a percentage of the amount that each one of those 
people would have been given if they had been enrolled for ex- 
cluding them. It is unfair to tell Congress that that condition 
existed, because it did not exist. 

Mr. Carter. Did Mr. McMurray or his firm ever have any con- 
tract of any character by which they were to assist in excluding Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws from the roll ? 

Mr. Hurley. Mansfield, McMurray & Cornish had a general con- 
tract to represent the nation. They received under that contract, as 
I am receiving now, a yearly salary for representing the nation in 
all matters. But they never had a contract that gave them a fee 
for the number of INIississippi Choctaws they might exclude from the 
roll. Their percentage fee was based entirely upon the number of 
persons whose names were upon the roll that they could have stricken 
from the roll. The names of these Mississippi Choctaws have never 
been upon the roll. 

Mr. Carter. Was that the only contract they had in relation to 
enrollment matters? 

Mr. Hurley, Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Their other contract was for the purpose of collecting 
royalties and representing the tribe in contentions they may have 
with the United States Government, was it not — their annual con- 
tract? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Harrison. Mr. Chairman, why would it not be a good idea, at 
some place in these hearings, to insert those McMurray contracts. 

Mr. Carter. They are in two or three hearings now. 

Mr. Harrison. In these hearings? 

Mr. Carter. No; not in this hearing, but in the Burke investi- 
gating committee hearings. 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Cantwell made the statement before this com- 
mittee that Mr. McMurray at one time called upon United States 
troops to eject the Mississippi Choctaws who had come to Missis- 
sippi from the Choctaw Nation. Mr. Harrison also, in his address, 
made the statement that a number of these people did come over to 
the Indian Territory and that the firm of Mansfield, McMurray & 
Cornish secured an injunction against them and prevented their 
enrollment. He also stated that when the Mississippi Choctaws 
came to the Choctav/ Nation they were not given any land to settle 
upon and were treated as intruders and ejected from the nation. 

On account of these statements the opinion seems to prevail 
among the Members of Congress that there were some Mississippi 
Choctaws who at some place and some time in the history of these 
citizenship proceedings were ejected from the nation. 

There was a man named Bounds, who settled near the town of 
Kiowa and started to fencing a great tract of land and making a 
big pasture. He was doing this just about the time the allotment 
in severalty was commenced. When asked his authority he said 
he represented people living in Mississippi, claimants to citizenship. 
He was enjoined from fencing the land until such time as those 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 39 

claimants should come and establish a residence and prove their 
right to enrollment. It was held that those people had no right to 
hire an agent to settle upon land in Indian Territory when their 
own residence there was required as a condition precedent to citi- 
zenship in the nation. 

I defy Mr. Harrison and Mr. Cantwell — they both talk a lot about 
putting Mississippi Choctaws out by force — I defy you, Mr. Har- 
rison, to cite me the name of one person, just one person, claiming 
as a Mississippi Choctaw who was ever removed from the Choc- 
taw Nation by injunction proceedings, by a police force, or by 
United States soldiers, or anyone else. The fact is that there 
never has been a Mississippi Choctaw forcibly removed from the 
Choctaw Nation. I v.ill consider Mr. Harrison's statement about 
the net-proceeds case later during my argument. I will give no 
more attention to Mr. Harrison's address at this time 

Mr. Harrison. You are making a very good speech when you 
quote my speech there. I was in hopes you would keep it up. 

Mr. Hurley (continuing). Only to say that I believe I have 
shown this, that the statements upon which Mr. Harrison relies as 
facts and by which he attempts to convince men that they should 
support his bill are — 

First. He states as a fact that the tribes have never interposed 
any bar against the enrollment of the Mississippi Choctaws. That 
statement is not borne out by the facts. I read into the record this 
morning an act of the Choctaw Council which refutes without fur- 
ther argument the statement made by him. His major premise, 
therefore, does not exist in fact. 

His second premise is that no one could be enrolled under section 
41 of the supplemental agreement who was not a descendant of a 
patentee, and that by reason of this law his constituents were ex- 
cluded. 

The fact is, as shown by the Jim Gift decision, that any person 
who could show that he was a descendant of a fourteenth-article 
claimant, either a patentee or a scrippee — and there were 4,161 scrip- 
pees and patentees — and who would remove to the Choctaw Nation, 
was entitled to enrollment under the supplemental agreement. 

The fact is that 1,627 persons, most of whom were full bloods, 
were enrolled under the provisions of that act. The necessity of 
proving their rights as descendants of fourteenth-article claimants 
was waived by that act as to full bloods, and they were enrolled 
without proof of their rights to enrollment. This entirely refutes 
Mr. Harrison's statement that no one but the descendants of the 
143 patentees could be enrolled under that act. 

Third. He states as a fact that they had a right to enrollment as 
citizens of the Choctaw Nation without removal to the nation. The 
facts is that every commission and every court that has ever passed 
upon that question — with the possible exception of an ex parte 
opinion by Judge Townsend, which was afterwards reversed by the 
same judge— has held that no Mississippi Choctaw or other nonresi- 
dent Indian was entitled to enrollment as a citizen of the Choctaw 
Nation without first having moved to and established a residence 
within the confines of the tribe. 



40 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Thus it will be seen that every argument that Mr. Harrison has 
advanced in favor of the enrollment of his constituents is based 
upon a premise that does not exist in fact. 

Mr. Post. What became of that class of Mississippi Choctaws who 
were not descendants of either the patentees or scrippees? 

Mr. Hurley. The class of Mississippi Choctaws who w^ere not 
descendants of patentees or crippees? I presume you mean the de- 
scendants of nineteenth-article and supplemental-article Indians 
under the treaty of 1830? 

Mr. Post. Well, I assume that some Indians were entirely left out 
of any provision of the treaty. Is that a fact or not ? 

Mr. HuPLEv. Well, there were, outside of the nineteenth-article 
and supplemental-article Indians — those are the Indians who were 
given tracts of land from 640 to 2,000 acres; chiefs and mingoes and 
headmen of the tribe; those were not fourteenth-article claimants. 
There were, however, 291— in one place in the decision it says 292 — 
heads of families who were not nineteenth or other article claimants, 
and who did claim under the fourteenth article, but were rejected. 
And they consequently received neither scrip nor money under the 
fourteenth article, nor land under the nineteenth and other articles 
of the treaty. Is that the class to which you refer? 

Mr. Post. That is the class to which 1 referred. What provision 
has ever been made as to that class? 

Mr. Hur^LEY. To answer your question, Mr. Post, I will quote from 
the decision of the Court of Claims, which appears at page 97, vol- 
ume 21, of the Reports of the Court of Claims: 

An examination of tlie findings in reference to the commission under the act 
referred to will show that, like the commission under the former acts, they had, 
consistent with the legal interests of the United States, a disposition to deal 
with the claimants in the broadest spirit of liberality and fairness. They 
served no policy save an examination of the claims according to the rules best 
calculated to ascertain the truth. 

And in another part it says : 

On June 16. 1845, the commission, under the act of 1842, reported that all 
Choctaw claims arising under the fourteenth article of the treaty presented in 
correct form h;)d been fully determined. Some few cases not adjusted for 
want of legal requisites. 

Finding 13 shows that the whole number of heads of families making appli- 
cation for and receiving land was 143, by the registration of Ward, amended by 
the addition of other names and the report of the commissioners appointed 
under the act of 1842. The number who successfully established their right 
and who did not receive land out of the reservation was 1,155. The number 
who failed was 292, making in the aggregate 1,585 claimants. 

Mr. Carter. What class is this you are reading about now ? I did 
not catch that. 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Post asked me if there were any Indians m Mis- 
sissippi who did not get scrip or land under the fourteenth article, 
or land under the nineteenth and other articles of the treaty. I 
replied to him that there were 292 heads of families, and I read a 
portion of the decision of the Court of Claims upon the subject. 

Again, at page 104 of the volume from which I am reading, in the 
opinion of the court I find the following: 

The-thirteenth finding shows that the connnissioners appointed under the act 
of 1842 rejected 292 claims: and it is insisted that these rejections were the 
consequence of the condition imposed by the third section of the act of 1842. 
in requiring claimants to show that on the 27th day of September. 1830, he 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 41 

had all iuiproveir.ent " in the then Choctaw country, ami that, having and ac- 
quiring an improvement at the phice and time aforesaid, did reside on the 
identical improvement, or a part of it, for a term of five years continuously." 

One of the questions of fact connected with the adjustment of the finding was 
to determine from the evidence the probable number who were rejected by the 
board in consequence of the condition prescribed by the act of 1842. 

We have, as is shown in the latter part of the finding, determined that the 
heads of families rejected by the conditions of the act of 1842 would aggregate 
225.760 acres. 

Now, those are the persons who attempted to signify their inten- 
tion to claim under the fourteenth article, who were rejected by the 
board of commissioners that were sent to Mississippi to determine 
who the claimants were. 

When the Choctaw Nation sued the United States Government, 
it contended that these people were erroneously rejected, for the 
reason that the condition which caused their rejection was a condi- 
tion in the act of 1842, which was not a requirement under the treaty 
of 1830. In other words, under the treaty of 1830, the fourteenth 
article claimants did not have to show that they owned an improve- 
ment and that they actually resided upon the improvement, and that 
condition in the act of 1842 caused the rejection of the claims of 292 
heads of families. 

Now Mr. Post has asked me the question, What did those 292 heads 
of families get? We have shown that the nineteenth and other 
article Indians got land : 143 heads of families, under the fourteenth 
article, got land; 3,885 persons, or 1,155 heads of families, got scrip 
and money in lieu of scrip. Then the only class of Mississippi 
Choctaws unaccounted for were the 292 heads of families. 

At page 1, volume 119 of the United States Supreme Court Re- 
ports, is set out the finding made by the Court of Claims in the Net 
Proceeds case, and the first finding is this : 

For claims under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830 not covered by 
the release of 1852, $417,650. 

That was the amount of money that the Supreme Court of the 
United States finally determined was due to the persons who were 
entitled to identification as fourteenth-article claimants, but who got 
neither land, money, nor scrip. 

The records of the Department of the Interior show that a court 
of claims was established by the Choctaw Nation to determine who 
should participate in the distribution of the Net Proceeds judgment; 
and I ask that the act creating that court be inserted in the record 
at this point. The act is as follows : 

AN ACT niakinp; distribution of the " net proceeds " money arisinar under Judgment of 
tlip Court of Claims of the United States rendered on the 16th day of December, 
A. D. 1SS6. 

Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Council of the Ghortaio Nation assem- 
bled. Tliat the principal chief of the Choctaw Nation is hereby authorized to ap- 
point three competent persons as connnissioners, one from each district, by and 
with the advice and consent of Ihe Senate, who shall !)e conunissinned by the 
principal chief, .-ind before they enter upon the disfharge of their duties shall 
take the oath of ollire ])rescribed by the constitution, and tlii'y shall elect one 
among themselves chief connnissioner, and shall appoint a clerk and bailiff, 
and a majority of the commissioners shall constitute a quorum for the dispatch 
of business. 

Skc. 2. Be it fiirlhrr enacted. That tlie duty of these commissioners shall be 
to proceed as .soon as practicable to ascertain the legal heirs of the individual 



42 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

claims that have been adjudicated by the court of claims of the Choctaw 
Nation under acts of the general council approved 1872 and May, 1875, which 
adjudication amounted to $825,000. If no reasonable objection appears, the 
commission shall issue certificates, signed by the commissioners present and 
attested by the clerk, for the amount of such claims to the person entitled 
thereto, and the United States Indian agent for the Five Civilized Tribes shall 
pay such said certificates out of the net proceeds money. 

Sec. 3. Be it further enacted. That the United States Indian agent for the 
Five Civilized Tribes is hereby authorized to make requisitions on the proper 
authorities of the United States on behalf of the Choctaw Nation for sufficient 
sums of money to pay the liabilities of the Choctaw Nation to the individual 
claims that have been adjudicated, or may hereafter be adjudicted, by the 
proper authorities of said Nation, and claims so adjudicated shall be reported 
to the United States Indian agent for the Five Civilized Tribes by the com- 
mission. The first requisition shall be for $825,000, to be paid to said agent 
out of the sum of $1,430,207.15. balance due the Choctaw Nation under judgment 
of the Court of Claims of the United States, rendered on the 16th day of Decem- 
ber, 1886, for the purpose of settling the individual claims that have been 
adjudicated by the court of claims of the Choctaw Nation, under acts of the 
general council approved 1872 and May, 1875. 

Sec. 4. Be it further enacted. That said commission, for the better convenience 
of the claimants, shall hold their meetings at the following places, to wit: In 
the first district at Poteau Station, Sans Bois court ground, and McAlester, 15 
business days at each place. In the second district at the circuit court ground 
at Sulphur Springs, Nashoba County, 20 business days, and at Uukfatah, in Bok- 
tuklo County, 10 business days. In the third district at the circuit court 
grounds, in Jackson County. 30 business days, and at Stringtown, in Atoka 
County, 20 business days, and in order to give every claimant an opportunity 
to appear before said board the commission shall hold 30 business days at Tush- 
kahomma, which shall be the final meeting of said commission. 

Sec. 5. Be it further enacted. That the clerk shall keep a fair and correct 
record of the proceedings of the commission, and the bailiff shall serve all orders 
and commands of the commission and keep order during business hours, and for 
that purpo.se he is hereby authorized to arrest any person for disturbing any 
person at the place of meeting, attending to business or for any other purpose, 
and turn such person over to the sheriff of the county where the meeting is 
held. 

Sec 6. Be it further enacted, That said commission shall under no circum- 
stances make allowance to any person whose claim has been rejected l)y the 
revisory board held at Atoka in the year 1876, but may, and are hereby required 
to, examine any new claim that may be presented and, if just, allow the same. 

Si:c. 7. Be it further enacted. That if a vacancy occurs by death or refusal to 
serve, the vac.-.ncy shall be filled by appointment of the principal chief; the 
principal chief shall set the time for the first meeting of the commission, to be 
held at Poteau Station, by giving 15 days' notice to the commissioners, and the 
commissioners shall give 15 days' notice before meeting at each place of meeting 
after the first meeting. 

Sec. 8. Be it further enacted, That said commission shall receive for their 
services herein the sum of $5 each per day and mileage, 10 cents per mile, actu- 
ally traveled in going to and from each place of meeting. The clerk and bailiff 
shall receive the same pay as a commissioner. The chief commissioner shall 
issue certificate on the national auditor for the pay of the officers of the commis- 
sion, and the treasurer shall pay the same. 

Sec. 9. Be it further enacted. That said commission shall procure at the 
expense of the Choctaw National all stationery necessary to run the business of 
the commission ; the chief commissioner shall issue his certificate on the national 
auditor for the amount necessary to pay for the stationery, and the auditor 
issue his warrant on the treasurer for the same. 

For the guidance of the connnission in examining claims and i.ssuing certifi- 
cates, the principal chief is hereby authorized to immediately procure the roll of 
the individual claimants that api)ears of record in the Interior Department at 
Wiishington, D. C, at the expense of the Choctaw Nation, payable on the 
certificate of the principal chief on the national auditor, and he shall issue 
his warrant on the treasurer for the same. All expenses incurred by the Choc- 
taw Nation on account of the Court of Claims shall be refunded out of the net 
proceeds money after individual claims are paid. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 43 

Sec. 11. Be it further enacted, Tliat the national secretary is hereby directed 
to furnish a certified copy of this act, one to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 
one to the Secretary of the Interior, and one to the United States Indinji agent 
for the Five Civilized Tribes; and all acts coming in conflict with this act are 
hereby repealed, and this act shall take effect and be in force from and after its 
passage. 
Approved, November 6, 1888. 

B. F. Smallwood, 
Principal Chief of the Choctaw Nation. 

This is to certify that the above and foregoing (pp. Nos. 1-5) is a true and 
correct copy from the original act now on file in this office. 

Witness my hand and the seal of the Choctaw Nation this November 26. 1S88. 

A. Tellf, 
National Secretary Choctaw Nation. 

There were former acts of the Choctaw Council on this subject, but 
this is the important one, as it covers all former acts on the subject. 

Mr. Post. I would like to hear that, but I have to go to the House 
for a vote now. 

Mr. Hurley. But the fact is that this $417,000 was recovered for 
them, A court of claims was established to find out who they and 
their heirs were, and that $417,000 was paid to the individuals, or 
their heirs, who received neither land, money, nor scrip under the 
fourteenth article. 

Mr. Post. Paid to them in Mississippi? 

Mr. Hurley. Part of the heirs were at that time living in Missis- 
sippi; but the great majority of them were in Indian Territory, in 
the Choctaw Nation. 

Now, I do not know whether you want to go more fully into that 
same question or not 

Mr. Miller. I believe, Mr. Hurley, that you are going to insert in 
the record the act of the Choctaw Legislature creating that claim 
tribunal. I believe that would be a very material thing to have 
put in. 

Mr. HuRLEF. Yes; I have put it in the record. 

Mr. Miller. For the simple reason — this is personal to me — that I 
have not attended all of these hearings, by reason of duties calling me 
elsewhere; but when the hearings are completed and the printed 
record is ready I intend — and I believe the other members of the 
committee do likewise — to make a careful examination of all the ma- 
terial submitted. For that reason I think it would be very well, as to 
such a material item as this, to at least call attention to it in the 
record. 

Mr. Hurley. Yes. Well, Mr. Chairman, I really have been some- 
what reluctant to put so many laws in the record as to unnecesarily 
burden it, but I believe Mr. Miller's statement is correct, and unless 
we get these hiws and citations in the record they will not be read 
when this matter is finally considered. 

Mr. Carter. Yes; I think an important matter like that ought to 
go in the record. 

Mr. HuRLEv. Yes. 

Mr. Miller. I have found before in these cases that they are argued 
before and after. And 1 find that in order to get a clear idea of the 
issues involved in the case it is necessary to have it down in black 
and white, and have it so that you can anange your facts jn-o and con 
and balance them back and forth; then you can get something of a 



44 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

clear notion of the situation. I do not believe a man can sit and 
listen to this for years and ever come to a logical result. I do not 
mean to say that the hearings are not valuable ; they are. But I think 
the written record is more important than the hearing. 

Mr. Carter. The hearings are valuable in calling attention to the 
part you want to hear. 

Mr. Miller. Yes ; and then you Imow where to look for it. 

Mr. HuRLEv. I will submit now the act of Congress of March 3, 
1837, which authorized the appointment of a commission to ascertain 
the names of the persons who had attempted to signify their inten- 
tion of acquiring rights under the fourteenth article, and all other 
acts under which those claims were considered and finally adjusted. 

(The acts referred to are as follows:) 

Chap. XXXIX. An act for the appointment of commissioners to adjust the claims to 
reservations of land under the fourteenth article of the treaty of eighteen hundred and 
thirty with the Choctaw Indians. 

Be it enacted hy the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States 
of Ainerica in Congress assembled, Thnt there shall be appointed by the Presi- 
dent, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, three commissioners 
whose duty it shall be to meet in the State of Mississippi at such time and place 
as the President shall appoint and designate, and there proceed to ascertain the 
name of very Choctaw Indian who was the head of an Indian family at the 
date of the treaty at Dancing Rabbit Creek, who has not already obtained a 
reservation under said treaty, and who can show by satisfactory evidence that 
he or she complied or offered to comply with all the requisites of the fourteenth 
article of said treaty to entitle him or her to a reservation under said article; 
and also the number and names of all the unmarried children of such heads of 
families who formed a part of the family and were over ten years of age. and 
likewise the number and names of the children of such heads of families as 
were under ten years of age, and report to the President, to be by him laid before 
Congress, all the names of such Indians, and the different sections of land to 
which such heads of families were respectively entitled, together with the opin- 
ions of the commissioners, and whether any part of said lands have been sold 
by the Government, and the proofs applicable to each case. 

Sec. 2. And br it further enacted. Tl'.at liofore entering upon their duties each 
of said commissioners shall, before some .ludge or justice of the peace, take an 
oath faithfully to discharge the duties imposed by this act. 

Sec. 3. And be it further enacted. That said commissioners are hereby author- 
ized to appoint a secretary, whose duty it shall be to record correctly all the 
proceedings of said board and faithfully presei've the same, as well as all depo- 
sitions and other papers filed before said board, and who shall take an oath to 
discharge the duties imposed on him by this act. 

Sec. 4. And be it further enacted. That upon the request of the commissioners 
it shall be the duty of the district attorney of the State of Mississippi to attend 
said board and give his assistance in procuring the attendance of witnesses, and 
his aid and advice in their examination, the better to enable the commissioners 
to ascertain the facts correctly in each case. 

Sec. 5. And be it further enacted. That each of said commissioners shall re- 
ceive, while in the discharge of the duties hereby imposed, a salary at the rate 
of $3,000 per annum, the secretary a salary at the rate of $1,500 per annum, 
and the district attorney a salary at the rate of $2,000 per annum, to be paid 
quarterly out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated. 

Sec. 6. And be it further enacted. That said commissioners shall have full 
power to sunnnon and cause to come before them such witnesses as they may 
deem necessary, and to have them examined on oath: and if any witness shall 
testify falsely, with an intention to mislead said commissioners, stich witness 
shall be guilty of willful and corrupt iter.jury, and shall upon conviction before 
any jurisdiction having cognizance thereof suffer the punishment by law in- 
flicted on those guilty of that offense. 

Sec. 7. And be it further enacted. That nothing contained in this act shall be 
so construed as to sanction what is called contingent locations which have been 
made by George M. Martin for the benefit of such Indians as were supposed to 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 45 

have been entitled to other hiiicls which have been sold by the United States, 
such contingent locations having been made without any legal authority, it being 
the true intent of this act to reserve to Congress the power of doing that which 
may appear just when a correct knowledge of all the facts is obtained. 

Sec. S. And he it finilicr enacted. That this act shall be in force to the first 
day of INIarch, eighteen hundred and thirty-eight, next, and no longer. 

Approved, March 3, 1837 (5 Stat. L., 180). 

Chap. XIII. An act to amend an act entitled "An act for the appointment of commis- 
sioners to adjust the claims to reservations of land under the fourteenth article of the 
treaty of eighteen hundred and thirty with the Choctaw Indians." 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States 
of America in Congress assembled, That the commissioners provided for in the 
act hereby amended, or a majority of them, shall have full power and authority 
to adjourn their sessions to such place or places, within the State of Missis- 
sippi, as in their judgment the interest of the Government and of the claimants 
may require such sessions to be held. 

Sec. 2. And be it further enacted, That in the case of the death, resignation, 
or absence of any one of the said commissioners the remaining two commis- 
sioners shall have full power and authority to proceed and execute the powers 
given by this act or the act hereby amended. 

Sec. 3. And be it further enacted. That the said commissioners shall have all 
the powers of a court of record for the purpose of compelling the attendance of 
witnesses, administering oaths, touching matters depending before them, pre- 
serving order, and punishing contempts ; and shall have power to make all 
needful rules for the regulation of the proceedings before them, as well as to 
employ one or more interpreters, and one or more agents to collect testimony 
for the United States. 

Sec. 4. Ayid be it further enacted. That for defraying the contingent expenses 
of the said commission the sum of $5,000 be, and the same is hereby, appro- 
priated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated. 

Sec. 5. And be it further enacted. That the said act shall be and remain in 
force until the 1st day of August next. 

Sec 6. And be it further enacted, by the authority aforesaid. That the com- 
pensation to be made to the district attorney for his services shall be equal to 
the compensation allowed to a commissioner under the act hereby amended. 

Sec 7. And be it further enacted, That nothing contained in this act, or the 
act which this is intended to amend, shall be so construed as to embrace the 
claim of any Indian or head of a Choctaw family who has removed west of the 
Mississippi River. 

Sec 8. And be it further enacted, That if it shall be proved to the satisfaction 
of said commissioners that any claimant has attempted, or shall attempt, to 
substitute the child of any other Indian as and for his own, or has attempted 
or shall attempt, by his testimony, to substitute for the child of any other 
claimant the child of another Indian, the name of such claimant so attempting 
to make such substitution shall be stricken from the list of claimants. 

Approved, February 22, 1838 (5 Stat. L., 211). 



Chap. CLXXXVII. An act to provide for the satisfaction of claims arising under the 
fourteenth and nineteenth articles of the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek, concluded in 
September, one thousand eight hundred and thirty. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives o) the United States 
of America in Congress assembled. That the act approved on the 3d of March, 

1837, entitled "An act for the appointment of commissioners to adjust the claims 
to reservations of land under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830, with 
the Choctaw Indians; and also the act approved on the 22d day of February, 

1838, entitled "An act to amend an act entitled 'An act for the appointment of 
commissioners to adjust the claims to reservations of l;ind under the fourteenth 
article of the treaty of 1830, with the Choctaw Indians,' so far as the same are 
not repealed or modified by the provisions of this act," be, and the same are 
hereby, revived and continued in force until the powers conferred by this act 
shall be fully executed, subject, nevertheless, to repeal or modification by any 
act of Congress. And all the powiM-s and duties of the conunissioncrs are hereby 
extended to claims arising under the nineteenth article of the said treaty, and 



46 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

under the supplement to the said treaty, to be examined in the same manner 
and with the same effect as in cases arising under the fourteenth article of the 
said treaty: Provided, That the salary of said commissioners shall not exceed 
the rate of $2,500 per annum. 

Sec. 2. And he it further enacted, That subpoenas for the attendance of wit- 
nesses before the said commissioners, and process to compel such attendance 
may be issued by the said commissioners, or any two of them, under their seals 
in the same manner and with the same effect as if issued by courts of record, 
and may be executed by the marshal of any district, or by any sheriff, deputy 
sheriff, or other peace officer designated by the said commissioners, who shall 
receive for such services the same fees as are allowed in the district court of 
the United States for the district in which the same shall be rendered for similar 
services, to be paid, on the certificate of the commissioners, out of the contin- 
gent fund appropriated by the fourth section of the act secondly above recited, 
which was approved on the 22d day of February, 1838, and which is revived by 
this act: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to revive 
such portion of the act approved the 3d day of March, 1837. referred to in the 
first section of this act, as provides for the employment and pay of the district 
attorney of either of the districts of the State of Mississippi. 

Sec. 3. And he it further enacted. That when the said commissioners shall 
have ascertained that any Choctaw has complied or offered to comply with all 
the requisites of the fourteenth article of the said treaty to entitle him to any 
reservation under that article, which requisites are as follows, to wit: That 
said Choctaw Indian did signify his or her intention to the agent in person, or 
by some person duly authorized and especially directed by said Indian to signify 
the intention of said Indian to become a citizen of the State, within six months 
from the date of the ratification of the said treaty, and had his or her name, 
within the time of six months aforesaid, enrolled on the register of the Indian 
agent aforesaid for that purpose; or shall prove to the entire satisfaction of 
the said commissioners and to the Secretary of War that he or she did signify 
his or her intention, within the term of six months from the date of the ratifi- 
cation of the treaty aforesaid, if his or her name was not enrolled in the reg- 
ister of the agent aforesaid, but was omitted by said agent; and, secondly, that 
said Indian did, at the date of making Siiid treaty, to wit, on the 2Tth 
day of September, 1830, have and own an improvement in the then Choc- 
taw country ; and that having and owning an improvement at the place 
and time aforesaid did reside upon that identical improvement, or a part of it, 
for the term of five years continuously next after the ratification of said treaty, 
to wit, from the 24th day of February, 1831, to the 24th day of Februai'y, 1836, 
unless it shall be made to appear that such improvement was, before the 24th 
day of February, 1836, disposed of by the United States, and that the reservee 
was dispossessed by means of such disposition ; and, thirdly, that it shall be 
made to appear to the entire satisfaction of said commissioners and to the Secre- 
tary, of War that said Indian did not receive any other grant of land under the 
provisions of any other article of said treaty; and, fourthly, that it shall be 
made to appear in like manner that said Indian did not remove to the Choctaw 
country west of the Mississippi River, but he or she had continued to reside 
within the limits of the country ceded by the Choctaw Indians to the United 
States by said treaty of 27th September, in the year 1830, it shall be the duty 
of said commissioners, if all and each of the above requisites shall be made 
clearly to appear to their satisfaction, and the Secretary of War shall concur 
therein, to proceed to ascertain the quantity of land to which said Indian, by 
virtue of the fourteenth article of said treaty, is entitled to, which, when ascer- 
tained, shall be located for said Indian, according to sectional lines, so as to 
embrace the improvement, or a part of it, owned by said Indian at the date of 
said treaty; and it shall be the duty of the President of the United States to 
issue a patent to said Indian for said land if he or she be living, and if not, to 
his or her heirs and legal representatives; and in like manner shall the com- 
missioners aforesaid ascertain the quantity of land granted by said article to 
each child of said Indian, according to the limitations contained in said article, 
and locate said quantity for said children contiguous to and adjoining the 
improvement of the parent of such child or children ; and the President shall 
issue a patent for each tract of land thus located to said Indian child if living, 
and if not, to the heirs and legal representatives of such Indian child. But if 
the United States shall have disposed of any tract of land to which any Indian 
was entitled under the provisions of said fourteenth article of said treaty, so 
that it is now impossible to give said Indian the quantity to which he is putitiprl 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 47 

including: his improvements, as aforesaid, or any part of it, or to his children on 
the adjoining lands, the said commissioners shall therenpon estimate the quan- 
tity to which each Indian is entitled and allow him or her for the same a 
quantity of land equal to that allowed, to be taken out of any of the public lands 
in the States of Mississippi, Ix)uisiana, Alabama, and Arkansas, subject to entry 
at private sale; and certificates to that effect shall be delivered, under the direc- 
tion of the Secretary of War. through such agent as he may select, not more 
than one-half of which shall be delivered to said Indian until after his removal 
to the Choctaw territory west of the Mississippi River. The said commis- 
sioners shall also ascertain the Choctaws. if any. who relinquished or offered 
to relinquish any reservations to which he was entitled under the nine- 
teenth article of the said treaty, or whose reservations under that article 
bad been sold by the United States; and shall also determine the quantity 
to which such claimant was entitled, and the quantity of land which should 
be allowed him on extinguishment of such claim at the rate of two-fifths of an 
acre for every acre of the land to which said claimant was entitled, said land 
having been estimated under this article at 00 cents per acre: Provided, never- 
theless, That no claim shall be considered or allowed by said commissioners for 
or in the name or behalf of any Indian claimant whose name does not appear 
upon the lists or registers of claimants made by Maj. Armstrong, special agent 
for that purpose, in conjunction with the three chiefs of the three Choctaw dis- 
tricts, and returned to the Department of War in Januai-y. 1832, and who does 
not appear from those registers to be entitled to a reservation under said nine- 
teenth article. 

Sec. 4. And be it further enacted. That the said commissioners, within two 
years from the time of their entering upon the duties of their ofHces. and as 
often as shall be required by the President of the United States, shall report 
to him their proceedings in the premises, with a full and perfect list of names 
of all the Choctaws whom they shall have determined to be entitled to reserva- 
tions under this act; the quantity of land to which each shall be so entitled, 
the number of claims which can be located according to the provisions of the 
fourth section of this act, and such as can not be located according to the pro- 
visions of the fourth section of this act: and the powers and duties of the 
said commissioners shall cease at the expiration of two years from the time of 
the first organization of the board; and their proceedings may be terminated by 
the President at any time previous to the expiration of the said two years. 

Sec. 5. And he it further enacted. That the commissioners to be appointed 
under this act shall also ascertain and determine the quantity of land to which 
any Choctaw or other person named in the supplement to the said treaty of 
Dancing Rabbit Creek was entitled by virtue thereof, and which such person 
has by any means been prevented from receiving. 

Sec. 6. And he it further enacted, That if the President of the United States 
shall approve and confirm the determination of the commissioners heretofore 
appointed to investigate the claims existing under the fourteenth article of the 
said treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek, in any case, he shall cause to be delivered 
to the claimant, if he be a Choctaw Indian, his legal representatives or heirs, 
certificates, as provided by the fourth section of this act, for the quantity of 
land to which such claimant shall appear, by such determination, to have been 
entitled, in full satisfaction and discharge of such claim : Provided, Such deter- 
mination was made by adhering, in every instance, to the requisites contained 
In the fourth section of this act: And -provided, also, That said claims, nor 
either of them, can not now be located, according to the provisions of the fourth 
section of this act. 

Sec. 7. And he it further enacted. That distinct accounts shall be kept of the 
certificates Issued in satisfaction of the claims provided for by this act, and of 
all expenses attending the execution of the same; and the amount thereof shall 
be retained and withheld from any distribution to the States. 

Sec. 8. And be it further enacted. That nothing in this act contained shall be 
so construed as to authorize the said commissioners to adjudicate any claim 
which may be presented by a white man who may have had, or now has, an 
Indian wife or family; and any patent to land which shall issue on any Indian 
claim under the provisions of the treaty afoi-esaid shall be issued to the Indian 
to whom the claim is allowed if living, and, if dead, to his or her heirs and legal 
representatives, any act of Congress or usage or custom to the contrary not- 
withstanding. 

Sec. 9. And be it further enacted. That no claim shall be allowed under the 
fourteenth article of said treaty If the said commissioners sh.'ill be satisfied by 



48 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

such proof as thej- may prescribe that said claim had been, previous to the 
expiration of Ave years from the ratification of said treaty, assigned, either 
in whole or in part ; and in case of a partial assignment or agreement for an 
assignment thereof the same shall be allowed so far only as the original Indian 
claimant was at that date the bona fide proprietor tliereof. 

Sec. 10. And he it further enacted, That all claims under either of the articles 
of said treaty mentioned above, or the supplemental articles thereof, which 
shall not be duly presented to said commissioners for allowance within one 
year after the final passage of this act shall be thereafter forever barred. 

Approved, August 23, 1842 (5 Stat. L., 513). 

Act of Congress approved March 3, 1845 (5 Stat. L., 777). 

That of the scrip which has been awarded or which shall be awarded to 
Choctaw Indians under the provisions of the law of 23d August, 1842, that por- 
tion thereof not deliverable East by the third section of said law in these words, 
" not more than one-half of which shall be delivered to said Indian until after 
his removal to the Choctaw territory, west of the Mississippi River," shall not 
be issued or delivered in the West, but the amounts awarded for land on which 
they resided, but which it is impossible for the United States now to give them, 
shall carry an interest of 5 per cent, which the United States will pay annually 
to the reservees under the treaty of 1830. respectively, or to their heirs and 
legal representatives forever, estimating the land to which they may be entitled 
at $1.25 per acre: Provided further. That so much of the law of 23d August, 
1842, as is inconsistent herewith is hereby repealed. 

Act of Congress approved July 21, 1852 (10 Stat. L., 19). 

For the interest on the amount awarded Choctaw claimants under the four- 
teentli article of the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek, of 27th September, 1830, 
for lands on which tliey resided, but which it is impossible to give them, and in 
lieu of the scrip that has been awarded under the act of 23d of August. 1842, 
not deliverable east by the third section of said law, per act of 3d of March, 
1845, for the half year ending 30th of June, 1852, $21,800: Provided, That after 
the 30th day of June. 1S52, all payments of interest on said awards shall cease, 
and that the Tt'cretary of tlie Interior be, and he is hereby, directed to pay said 
claimants the .imouut of principal awarded in each case, respectively, and that 
the amount necessary for this purpose be, and the same is hereby, appropriated, 
not exceeding $872,000 : Provided further. That the final payment and satisfac- 
tion of said awards shall be first ratified and approved as a final release of all 
claims of such parties under the fourteenth article of said treaty, by the proper 
national auttiority of the Choctaws, in such form as shall be prescribed by the 
Secretary of the Interior. 

Act of Congress approved August 30, 1852 (10 Stat. L., 42). 

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he hereby is, authorized to examine 
the reservation claims of the Choctaws known as Bay Indians and of those 
Choctaws in whose cases the scrip awarded by the late board of commissioners 
has not been issued ; and where he shall find that such Indians are clearly 
entitled to land under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830, and under 
the several acts heretofore passed in relation to such claims, he is hereby 
authorized to extend to such claimants the provisions applicable to such claims 
in the acts of 23d August, 1842, and of 3d March, 1845. 

Act Of Congress approved March 3, 1853 (10 Stat. L., 227). 

That the authority of the Secretary of the Interior to examine the claims of 
Choctaws to reservations of land under the treaty of 1830 shall extend to all 
cases recommended by either of the boards of commissioners appointed to ex- 
amine said claims, and his awards in scrip shall be received by them in full 
satisfaction of their claims against the Government arising under said treaty, 
and the scrip thus awarded shall be received as other warrants in payment for 
any public lands subject to sale at private entry. 

Mr. Hurley (continuing). I will now submit the act of the Choc- 
taw Council, approved October 1, 1859, providing for the appoint- 
ment of a commission to determine those entitled to a portion of 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 49 

money awarded by the Senate in the net-proceeds claim. The claim 
was not paid under the award of the Senate but was paid more than 
20 years later under a decision of the Supreme Court. Consequently 
the individual claims were not paid to the individual claimants under 
this act of the council. They were paid under the findings of the 
Court of Claims or commission created by act of the Choctaw Coun- 
cil of November 0, 1888, which has heretofore been placed in this 
record. I am submitting this act of the council only for the informa- 
tion it contains as to the nature of the net-proceeds recovery : 

An act entitled "An act defining tbe duties and powers of tlie commissioners, the jurisdic- 
tion of tlio court of claims, fixing tlieir pay, and for other purposes." 

Section 1. Be it enacted by the General Cotmcil of the Choetaio Nation, That 
whereas the Senate of the United States has awarded to the Choctaws the net 
proceeds of the hind ceded by them to the United States by the treaty of Danc- 
ing Rabbit Creek, September, A. D. 1S30, deducting therefrom the proper ex- 
penditures for surveying, selling, etc. 

Sic. 2. Be it further enaetcd, That whereas the Choctaws, by the twelfth 
article of the treaty of June 22, 1S55, accepted the same in full satisfaction of 
mUional and individual claims, thereby becoming liable and assuming the pay- 
ment of individual claimants. 

Sec. 3. Be it further enacted. That the three commissioners now appointed 
under section 6 of the constitution and two others to be appointed by the 
governor, who, after being commissioned and qualified according to law, shall 
be, and the same are hereby, constituted a court of claims, who, before entering 
upon the duties of their' office, shall take the oath of office prescribed in the 
constitution, which oath may be administered by the governor or jtidge of any 
court of record. 

Sec. 4. Be it further enacted, That the court of claims shall have jurisdiction 
over all claims for self-emigration, all claims under the fourteenth and nine- 
teenth articles of the treaty of September, 1830, and also claimants under the 
supplement, claims for lost property in emigrating to this nation during the 
years 1S31, 1832, and 1833, and for property scheduled to the General Govern- 
ment agents. 

Sec. 5. Be it further enacted. That all claims against the nation shall be 
brought within 18 mouths from and after the p.-ibsnge of this act, and not 
thereafter. Claimants shall have the right to appear before said court of 
claims in proper person or by attorney: Provided, That none shall be attorneys 
except those legally qualified to practice before the courts of this nation, being 
citizens thereof. 

Sec. 6. Be it further enacted, That said court of claims shall, as well as 
claimants, have the power to summon any person or persons as witnesses on 
the part of the nation, and in case the personal attendance of the summoned 
can not be had depositions may be taken by either party before any judge or 
other officer legally qualified to administer an oath, sufficient notice being given 
to the adverse party of the time and place of taking the same. 

Sec. 7. Be it further enacted. That the court of claims shall choose from 
among themselves the presiding commissioner, who shall be styled the chief 
commissioner, and enter the same on the minutes of the coiu't, and said chief 
commissioner sliall have power to sign the minutes and certify any matter of 
fact of record in said court. 

Sec. S. Be it further enaetcd. That the court of claims shall have power to 
appoint a clerk, by and with the advice of the governor, to hold his office as 
long as business may require, but may be removed for any good and sufficient 
cause fr(im office. Siiid clerk shall take the oath of office prescribed in the 
constitution l)efore any judge of a court of record, and sliall be allowed for his 
services .$3 per d;iy, payable quarterly out of the National Treasury by certified 
certificate from under the hand and seal of the chief commissioner of the court. 

Sec. 9. Be it further enacted, That for preventing errors in entering upon the 
judgment or orders of said court the minutes of the proceedings every day 
shall be drawn up by the clerk before the next day's sitting of the court, when 
the same shall be read in open court and such corrections as may be necessary 
ni:ide and then signed by the chief conunissioner of the court, and carefully 
preserved in a well-bound book to be kept for the purpose, if necessary, of 

8S855— 15 4 



50 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES, 

making a pro rata payment on adjudicated claims of judgment rendered, and 
the last daj' of each sitting of such court the proceedings of the day shall be 
drawn up, read, corrected, and signed on the same day as aforesaid. 

Skc. 10. Jic it further enacted, That the commissioners shall for their services 
receive $3 for every day they shall he actually engaged in the discharge of their 
duties as commissioners, payable quarterly out of any funds in the National 
Treasury not otherwise appropriated — a certificate, under the hand and seal 
of the chief commissioner, of the number of days and the amount shall be pre- 
sented to the auditor, who shall issue his warrant on the National Treasurer 
for the same. 

And he it further enacted. That the witness or witnesses appearing in behalf 
of the nation in the court of claims will be allowed 2 cents per mile and 50 
cents per day in attending the above said court, out of any money in the 
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, on the order or certificate of the chief 
conunissioner, to the national auditor for the same. 

Skc. 11. Be it further enacted. That in case any vacancy shall occur in the 
court of claims, either by death, resignation, or removal from office, the gov- 
ernor shall have power to fill such vacancy by appointment. 

Sec. 12. Be it further enacted, That in case of necessity the court shall have 
power to appoint a bailiff who shall execute all orders of said court and for his 
services shall receive the same as that of constable for like services. 

Sec. 13. Be it further enacted. That the said court shall hold its session at 
the following places, to wit: SkuUyville, one month, conunenoing first Monday 
in January, ISGO; John Riddle's, two weeks, commencing first Monday in Feb- 
ruary, 1860; Boggy Depot, commencing third Monday in February, to hold two 
weeks; Mayhew, three weeks, commencing first Monday in March, 1860; .Tno. 
Caffrey's. three weeks, commencing fourth Monday in IMarch, 1860 ; Doaksville, 
one month, commencing third Monday in April, 1860; Lukfatah, one mouth, 
commencing third Monday in May, 1860; Jessee McKinney's, two weeks, com- 
mencing third Monday in June, 1860. 

Be it further enacted, That in case the said court of claims shall not com- 
plete the adjudication of claims enrolled within specified times then additional 
terms shall be held by said court ; times and place to be fixed by said court for 
final and entire adjudication. 

Approved, October 21, 1859. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, I will be glad to have any questions in regard 
to the statement that I have made as to who were the real benefici- 
aries under the recovery that was made against the United States in 
the so-called Net Proceeds case. 

I now ask to be inserted in the record a statement of the account 
with the Choctaw made by the Secretary of the Interior, in con- 
formity with the resolution and decision of the Senate of the United 
States of March 9, 1859. This is the statement which was afterwards 
approved by the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. 

(The statement referred to is as follows:) 

Statement of account xoith the Choctaw Indians, in conformity icith the reso- 
lutions and decision of the Senate of the United States of March 9, 1859. 

Acres. 

Total area of lands ceded by the Choctaws by the treaty of 27th 

September, 1830 10,423, 189. 69 

Area of reservations " allowed and secured " which are to be de- 
ducted and excluded from computation in the account 334,101.02 

Leaving 10, 089, 038. 67 

Quantity sold up to January 1, 1859 5, 912, 664. 63 

Residue of said lands 4,176,374.04 

Of this residue, 2,292,766 acres have been disposed of under 
the swamp-land act and grants for railroads and school purposes 
up to January 1, 1859. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 51 

The proceeds of the sales of the hinds sold up to January 1, 

1859, viz, 5.912,664.63 acres, amounted to $7, 556, 578. 05 

The residue of said lands, viz, 4,176,374.04 acres, at 12^ cents 

per acre, amounted to 522,046.75 



8, 078, 614. 80 
From which sum the following deductions are 
to be made: 

First. The cost pf the survey and sale of the 
lands, viz, 10,423,139.69 acres, at 10 cents per 

acre $1, 042, 313. 96 

Second. Payments and expenditures under 
the treaty, which are as follows: 
Fifteenth article: 

Salaries of chiefs for 20 years___ $12, 921. 25 
Paj' to speaker of three districts 

for four years 354. 66 

Pay of secretary for same period- 550. 00 

Outfit and swords to captains, 99 

in number 4,930.56 

Pay to the same, at $50 per year, 

for four years 19, 604. 65 

38, 361. 12 

Sixteenth article : 

Removal and subsistence, per 

statement of second auditor 813,927.07 

On same account, per additional 

statement made in this office for 

expenditures from 1838 to date_ 401, 556. 17 
Amount paid for cattle 14, 283. 28 

1,229,766.52 

Seventeenth article : 

Annuity for 20 years 400,000.00 

Nineteenth article: 

50 rents per acre for reserva- 
tions relinquished $24,840.00 

Amount to orphan reservations— 120, 826. 76 

145, 666. 76 

Twentieth article: 

Education of 40 youths for 20 

yenrs - 217, 260. 73 

Council house, house for each 

chief, and church for each dis- 
trict 9, 446. 75 

$2,500 annually for the support 

of 3 te.ichers for 20 years 50, 000. 00 

Three blacksmiths for 16 years. 38,988.86 

Millwri^'ht for 5 vears 3,050.00 

2,100 blankets 7,496.70 

Rifles, molds, etc., to each 

emigrating wnrrlor 43,969.31 

1,000 axes, plows, hoes, wheels, 

and cards 11,400.20 

400 looms 7,193.53 

1 ton iron, and 2 hundredweight 

of steel, annuity to each district 

for 16 years 8,051.15 

396, 947. 23 

Twenty-first article: 

Annuity to W;iyne warriors 1,818.76 

3d. Scrip allowed in lieu of reservations, / 

viz, 1.399.920 acres, at $1.25 per acre 1,749,900.00 V 

Payments made to meet the contingent ex- 
penses of the corandssioners appointed to 
adjust claims under the fourteenth article 
of the Choctaw treaty of Sept. 27, 1830— 51, 320. 79 



52 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Twenty-first nrticle — Continued. 

For A^iirious expenses growing out of the 
location nnd sale of Choctaw reservations, 
and perfecting titles to the same, includ- 
ing contingent expenses, such as pay of wit- 
nesses, interpreters, etc., incurred in ex- 
ecuting the act of Mar. 3, 1837, and sub- 
sequent acts relative to adjusting claims 
under the fourth article of the treaty 

of 1830 $21,408.36 

For payments made for Choctaw account, ^ 
being for expenses incurred in locating 
reservations under the treaty with said tribe 
of Sept. 27, 1830 19,864.00 

Total amount of charges 5,097,367.50 

When deducted from the proceeds of the land sold, and the 

" residue of said lands," at 12^ cents per acre $5, 097, 367. 50 

Leaves a balance due to Choctaws of 2,981,247.30 

Office of Indian Affairs, March 22, 1860. 

Mr. Miller, Have you a statement showing who the beneficiaries 
were under the distribution by the Choctaw Nation of the net pro- 
ceeds recovered? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir — oh, do you mean the statement showing to 
whom it was paid? 

Mr. Miller. Yes; something like that. 

Mr. Hurley. It was impossible — or I will not say impossible, but 
impracticable — for me to make an entire list of claimants; but I 
brought before the committee for examination a record of the claims 
that were submitted by individuals, and a few of the cases 

Mr. Miller (interposing). Is that the record that was kept by the 
board? 

Mr. Hurley. By the court of claims. 

Mr. Miller. By the court of claims? You mean the court of 
claims appointed by the Choctaw Council? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes; appointed by the Choctaw Council. And I 
brought a few of the jackets containing the petitions of the individ- 
ual claimants, stating who they claimed through and the number of 
heirs now living and the amount of the claim. The decisions are 
contained in the jackets also, showing the award, the grounds upon 
which they were made, and to whom it should be paid; and I have 
the docket here [indicating] showing the time and place of the hear- 
ing on those claims, and with marks showing the ones that were 
granted and those rejected. All these things show conclusively that 
full and final consideration was given to every individual claim to 
participate in the net-proceeds judgment. 

The claimants in those cases appeared both in person and by attor- 
neys; and the warrants were finally issued to the person whose claim 
was established or to some person appearing for him or her who had 
obtained from the original claimant, or the heirs of the original 
claimant, a power of attorney to represent him. 

Mr. Harrison. Mr. Hurley, you speak now of the part of the scrip 
that was converted into money, do you not ? 

Mr. Hurley. No. sir; I have left that subject, on account of a ques- 
tion asked me by Mr. Miller, and I am now discussing the net-pro- 
ceeds case. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 53 

I would like to distinguish in the minds of the members of the 
committee the difference between the $872,000 scrip payment and the 
payment under the net-proceeds recovery. They were entirely differ- 
ent transactions. 

The $872,000 payment Avas the money that was derived through 
the capitalization of the one-half of the scrip given to fourteenth- 
article claimants, in 1842, in lieu of land which they should have 
received under that article, which money was paid to them after their 
removal to the Choctaw Nation. The muster rolls show that prior to 
1855, 3,400 of those scrip claimants did emigrate to the Choctaw 
Nation and did receive pay there. The rolls showing the payment, 
with the name of each claimant, the amount received, and the name 
of a witness or witnesses to each signature, appear in longhand in 
the office of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs in this city. They 
are too voluminous to bring up here; and I think it unnecessary to 
go to the expense of making a copy of the entire matter for this rec- 
ord, because it would really be too voluminous to go into the record ; 
but the records are there, and they may be examined by those in- 
terested. 

Mr. Post. Why were not the Indians given all the scrip at one 
time ? 

Mr. Hurley. The acts of Congress, which I inserted in the record, 
Mr. Post, during your absence, showed that this condition existed : 

Wlien the United States Government found that all of the Indians 
who had attempted to signify their intention to receive benefits under 
the fourteenth article had not been given the opportunity to reserve 
their rights, the United States then thought of giving them their 
land; but it found that the land had been taken up by other settlers, 
and conditions were such that the Government could not then give 
them the land to which they were entitled. It was then agreed that 
the United States would issue to each one of those claimants scrip 
that would entitle them to take up land on the public domain. One- 
half of that scrip was issued to those claimants in Mississippi. There 
was not enough in the public domain there for them to take up 

Mr, Post (interposing). Well, the scrip provided that they should 
make entries in any one of four States, did it not ? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes. Arkansas 

Mr. Post (interposing). Arkansas, Alabama, Louisiana, and Mis- 
sissippi. 

Mr. Hurley. Yes. But right in Mississippi, where the Indians 
were, they had not this public land to take up. As a consequence 
the Indians disposed of that scrip improvidently. 

Mr. Post. Well, the point that I asked you was, Why was not the 
scrip delivered to them at one time? Why was half of it withheld? 

Mr. Hurley. AVell, half of it was withheld until the Indians 
should remove west of the Mississippi River. In other words, the 
policy of the Government was to effectuate a removal of the Choc- 
taws out of Mississijipi ; and they were to issue the other half of the 
scrip as soon as the Choctaws removed to a State west of the Missis- 
sippi River and had taken up land with the first half on the public 
domain. But the Indians 

Mr. Post (interposing). But suppose a Mississippi Choctaw con- 
cluded that he would locate on public lands in Louisiana or Alabama 



54 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

or Mississippi; what provision was made for delivering the other 
half of the scrip ? 

Mr. Hurley. Well, as a matter of fact, I do not know that a case 
of that kind has arisen, and I have read in American state papers 
a number of the controversies growing out of the issuance of that 
scrip and that question did not arise. But the pay for the second 
half of the scrip was not issued until the claimants went to Indian 
Territory. That was a condition precedent to their receiving the 
money for the second half of the scrip. 

Mr. Post. Was there a provision in the act of Congress authoriz- 
ing the issuance of this scrip to the effect that one-half of it was not 
to be delivered until they removed west of the Mississippi River? 

Mr. HuRLF.Y. Yes, sir. I am reading now from the act of March 
3, 1845, Fifth Statutes, 777 : 

That of the scrip which has been awarded or which shall be awarded to the 
Choctaw Indians under the provisions of the law of the 23d of August, 1842, 
that portion thereof not deliverable east by the third section of snid law, in 
these words, " Not more than one-half of which shall be delivered to said In- 
dian until after his removal to the Choctaw territory west of the Mississippi 
Kiver," shall not be issued or delivered in the west, t)ut the amounts awarded 
for land on which they resided, which it is impossible for the United States 
now to give them, shall carry an interest of 5 per cent, which tlie United 
States will pay annually to the reservees under the treaty of 1830. respectively, 
or their heirs and legal representatives, forever, estimating the land to which 
they may be entitled at $1.25 per acre. 

Then there is a proviso. Does that cover your point? 

Mr. Post. Yes ; that covers my point. 

Mr. Richardson. Well, is it not a fact that the scrip w^hich was 
delivered in Mississippi went to the attorneys, who had contracts 
for one-half of what these Indians received? 

Mr. Hurley. It was ever so in Mississippi, Mr. Richardson; the 
Indians got very little, if any, of the scrip. It was taken from them 
by their " friends." ISIuch has been said about the manner in which 
the Indians have been treated in Oklahoma, but the Indians in Okla- 
homa have their rights of citizenship in that State and are allowed 
to exercise those rights. Their children have a right to attend the 
schools with white children, and they do attend those schools. They 
have their property and are guarded in their property rights by both 
the Federal and State governments. Many of them are professional 
men — bankers and business men ; some of them are State and Federal 
officials. They are good citizens and have the respect and esteem of 
the white citizens of our State. A man from Mississippi would not 
have much to say about the treatment that the Oklahoma Indians 
have received if he Mould consider the history of the treatment of 
the Mississippi Choctaws by the people of Mississippi. The fact is 
that the Choctaw Indians in 1820 owned 14,000,000 acres of land in 
the State of Mississippi; the remnants of the tribe in that State 
to-day do not own an acre of that land. It is true 4,000,000 acres of 
the tract was traded for the land in the West and that the Choctaws 
west recovered for a portion of what remained, but a great portion 
was reserved for the Indians who remained in INIississippi. 

The Indians who remained in Mississippi were then of a resolute, 
independent character. They are now a downtrodden people, bereft 
of the spirit of self-reliance and self-respect, their children compelled 
to attend school with the negroes if they go to school at all. They 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TKIBES. 55 

have been deprived of their lands and driven from their homes by the 
people of Mississippi ; and in all this the people in Mississippi were 
aided and abetted by the United States Government. The Mississippi 
Choctaws have been reduced to a state that is almost peonage ; their 
intelligence seems to have been entirely dethroned by the conditions 
under which they have been compelled to live for almost a century. 
They are now a stolid people, wh'o gaze at the ground with the empti- 
ness of age in their faces. That is what these " friends " of the Mis- 
sissippi Chcotwas have done for the Choctaws in Mississippi. These 
are the " friends " who are appearing here and asking you. to send 
the money belonging to the Oklahoma Choctaws to Mississippi for 
the Mississippi Choctaws. For whom do they want this money? 
For the man to whom they have denied in practice the right of citi- 
zenship which they gave him under the laws; for the man to whose 
children they have denied the right to attend the public schools 
unless they go w^th the negro. 

What do they ask us ta do now ? They ask us to send to Mississippi 
the funds that belong to the Oklahoma Choctaws and Chickasaws 
by every legal and moral right. They say that the Mississippi Choc- 
taws are in justice entitled to this money. This is a late day for them 
to talk of justice to the Mississippi Choctaws. I suppose the Texas- 
Oklahoma Investment Co. was organized for the purpose of doing 
" justice " to the Mississippi Choctaws. 

If the United States Government and the people of Mississippi 
had dealt justly with the Mississippi Choctaws and had accorded 
them their legal rights, the Mississippi Choctaws would now have 
far more than any Choctaw or Chickasaw in Oklahoma. 

It was ever so, Mr. Richardson. The Mississippi Choctaws have 
never been allowed to get any of the rights that were given them 
under the treaty of 1830 except those that were given to them by 
the Choctaw Nation. The United States Government and the people 
among whom they lived in Mississippi have not dealt justly with 
them, and if the Mississippi Choctaws have any claim now, it is 
against the Government of the United States and not against the 
Choctaw Nation. 

We will never consent to send money belonging to the Okhihoma 
Choctaws to Mississippi to be handled by these " friends " of the 
Mississippi Choctaws. 

Mr. KiciiARDSON. Well, is it not a fact that the provisions of the 
bill which was introduced for the relief of the full-blood Choctaws 
placed their funds, which were proposed to be given them for lands 
Avhich were to be bought from them exclusively, under the super- 
vision of the Secretary of the Interior? 

Mr. Hur.LEv. Mi-. Chairman, the very acts which I have read into 
the record provided that this scri]), which w\as really the money that 
was due them for the land that they had not received, should l)e given 
to the Indians, and it was given the Indians, and it was taken from 
them by the people of Mississippi. 

Mr. IvTciiAiiDsoN. Was any of that money given to the Indians liv- 
ing in Mississippi ? 

Mr. IIuRiJov. The first half of the scrip was issued to them there. 

Mr. IviciiAKDsoN. Yes; but after that, which the record shows was 
in fact given these attorneys, wa.s it not a fact that they refused to 



56 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

give them anything more until they removed, and those who did not 
remove did not get anything? 

Mr. Hurley. Now, I will be specific in answer to your question, 
Mr. Richardson. The records relative to those payments to which 
you refer are easy of access, and they are found in the office of the 
Commissioner of Indian Affairs and the Auditor for the Interior 
De]5ai-tment, and show that the sum of $872,000 was delivered by the 
Government to Philip H. Raiford, Indian agent, under date of Sep- 
tember 11, 1852. 

A gent. Raiford, in the month of November, 18.52, turned the money 
over to Indian Agent John Drennon, and in the same month Indian 
Agent Drennon turned the money over, on the requisition of William 
Wilson, Indian agent, who paid out the greater part of the same to 
persons entitled thereto under the award made by the commission 
appointed under the act of 1852. 

Mr. Wilson's accounts are a matter of record in the auditor's office, 
and show that prior to June 4, 1853, he paid out of this money to 
individual claimants, under article 14, $686,300 principal and $36,- 
530.63 interest. The money was paid to 2,983 claimants, whose 
names appear on the Wilson pay roll. 

Agent Wilson turned over the balance of the money in his hands 
to Douglas H. Cooper, agent of the Choctaws, in June, 1853, and 
Cooper's account, on file in the same place, shows that to August, 
1854, he* had paid out $59,533.94 of this money to 300 individual 
claimants. The account of Cooper for the last two quarters of 1854 
and the first quarter of 1855 can not be found. That is, I have not 
been able to find them in a search of the records of the Indian Office, 
although there are other papers there that show that the money was 
really paid in the same manner as were the first payments to which 
I have referred; and, of course, there is only a minor part of the 
money left at this time. 

Mr. RiciiARnsox, Well, Mr. Hurley, is it not a fact that these 
persons disbursing this fund, and particularly Mr. Cooper, in their 
report to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs stated that it was 
their understanding and their attitude that they were not to pay 
this money to any persons except those in Oklahoma or in the Choc- 
taw Nation; and they asked instructions in regard to whether they 
should pay to any person who came from Mississippi to the Choctaw 
Nation to receive his payment, with the intention of returning to 
Mississippi, and they were advised that they should not make any 
payments to any persons except those who remained in the Choctaw 
Nation, and that the people in Mississippi did not get any money, 
and that these figures leave unaccounted for over 1,200 of those 
claimants who lived in Mississippi? 

Mr. Hurley. I beg your pardon; it does not leave them unac- 
counted for. Of course, the records, on account of the outbreak of 
the Civil War at that time, were incomplete, but it could not leave 
unaccounted for 1,200 persons. Agent Wilson had paid up to 2,900 
of them, in round numbers 

Mr. Richardson (interposing). Two thousand two hundred, or 
was it 2,900? 

Mr. Hurley. I said in rounrt ntmibers, 2,900; to be exact, it was 
:2.983. That is the number Affent Wilson paid. Now. there were 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES, 57 

other payments after that, and it left but a small amount of the 
money, probably $75,000, that I am unable to account for. 

And $75,000 would not cover any 1,200 claimants, when the 
$872,000 was only to cover 3,885 claimants. So you see there might 
have been about 150 or 200 claimants that I have not accounted for; 
but if we could get the entire records that far back we could account 
for every one of them, because that money was paid out. 

Mr. Post. Mr. Hurley, in the case of the Choctaw Nation v. The 
United States they were charged up with this $872,000, were they not ? 

Mr. Hurley. That is a point I have not yet covered fully. 

Mr. Post. But the point I want to make is that if they charged 
up the entire sum it must have been distributed. a 

Mr. Hurley. Yes; they were charged up with it. The fact is tlint 
all the arguments that have been made before this committee up to 
this time — by Mr. Harrison on the floor of the House and by others- 
have been to the effect that the Choctaw Nation received $8,078,614.80 
for damages done the Mississippi Choctaws. 

Now, that is just about as unfair a statement as a man can make 
as to the results of that litigation. The fact is that after an ap- 
praisement the United States Government found that the net pro- 
ceeds of all the property which the Choctaws had owned in Missis- 
sippi amounted to $8,078,614.80. 

Then the United States Government made charges against the 
Choctaws in the amount of $5,097,367.50 and deducted that from the 
amount due. 

Our friends say that we got that money for damages done Missis- 
sippi Choctaws, and especially the fourteenth article claimants. 

Mr. Carter. What was the balance there — the net judgment? 

Mr. Hurley. The balance which the Choctaw Nation finally re- 
covered was $2,981,247.30. I have put this entire statement in the 
record before. The fact is that in place of recovering for damages 
done the Mississippi Choctaws and fourteenth article claimants, 
whose cases are being presented here, the Choctaw Nation was 
charged up with every dollar that these people received in scrip, 
mone}^, and land. 

Mr. Carter. That they had received? 

Mr. Hurley. That they received. Here it is [reading] : " Third. 
Scrip allowed in lieu of reservations, 1,399,920 acres, at $1.25 per 
acre, amounting to $1,749,900 " — that the ChoctaAvs were charged 
with because of the fact that it had been given to Mississippi Choc- 
taws as their distributive share of the Choctaw estate under the 
fourteenth article. 

Mr. Carter. How had it been given to them, Mr. Hurley? Is 
that the scrip ? 

Mr. Hurley. That is the scrip and the money in lieu of scrip that 
I speak of. 

Mr. Post. That is the scrip. Mr. Hurley, it seems to me that there 
was some discrepancy there. 

Mr. PIurley. There was a recovery by the Choctaw Nation of 
$417,000 for Choctaws who claimed under the fourteenth article. 
This was in the Net Proceeds case. 

Mr. Post. How do you account for that? 

Mr. Hurley. Well, as I stated to the committee before, under 
the act of 1842, under which act this roll of scrippees who had at- 



58 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

tempted to signify their intention to remain in Mississippi was 
made up, there was a provision inserted that the claimant must 
show, in addition to the fact that he had attempted to reserve his 
right under the fourteenth article, that he was also the owner of 
improvements in 1830 and had resided upon the improved land 
for a period of five years. That requirement was not made by 
the treaty of 1830, and the requirement excluded from identification 
292 heads of families, and those persons did not get scrip or money 
or land under the fourteenth article, although they were fourteenth- 
article claimants, and the Choctaw Nation recovered from the 
United States $417,000 to cover the amount of land or scrip or 
money those people should have received, and the Choctaw Nation 
thereupon established a Court of Claims, sought out the descendants 
of those 292 heads of families, and paid to each individual the 
amount that they were entitled to of that $417,000. 

Now, how can anyone justly make a claim against the Choctaw 
Nation when, as a matter of fact, the nation was charged up with 
instead of having gotten it — I can not understand the workings 
of a man's mind who can take the decision and read it and arrive 
at the conclusion that it was an asset for the Choctaw Nation in 
place of a charge against them. 

Mr. Harrison in his statement goes a little further than saying 
it is an asset. 

Mr. Post. What truth is there in the statement that that $417,000 
was paid to the descendants of the 292 heads of families? 

Mr. Hurley. I do not laiow whether you were in here, Mr. Post, 
when I said it would be impracticable to bring the entire record 
here. 

Mr. Post. I understand. Do the records show that? 

Mr. Hurley. The records show that. And I have brought one of 
the documents here showing the appearance of the claimants, show- 
ing that each of them had their attorneys and proceeded in the 
regular way, showing the petition which they filed, the finding 
which the court made adjudging to each one his proportionate 
share, finally the vouchers are on file showing that the amount due 
to each individual was paid to that individual or to an attorney 
holding the power of attorney from him. 

To get back to Mr. Harrison's statement in regard to this $8,- 
000,000, he says : 

The Choctaw tribe in Indian Territory sued for $8,000,000 because of Wards' 
actions and because of the actions of other agents of the Federal Government 
in not enrolling the people in Mississippi and for defrauding them out of scrip 
and Innd. 

And do j-ou know, after taking volumes of testimony and listening to ex- 
haustive legal arguments, that the United Rtntes Supreme Court awarded 
a judgment to the Choctaw Tribe living in Indian Territory for approximately 
$8,000,000? This judgment was paid to the Choctaw Nation in the West by 
the United States Government, and the amount of the judgment, less the cost 
of the suit, went into the funds of the Choctaw Trilie. It is now a part of 
the funds of that tribe. 

That is the statement made by Mr. Harrison, in the face of the 
statement submitted to the United States Senate by the Department of 
the Interior; in the face of the finding of the Court of Claims; in the 
face of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States 
which shows that there was not a dollar of that recovered for damage 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 59 

A 

done to any fourteenth-article Choctaws in Mississippi, except those 
292 heads of families who received neither land, money, nor scrip, and 
the records of the Indian Office show conclusively that every one of 
those people got the amount of that Avhich they were entitled to. 
And the $1,749,900 which was paid to the other fourteenth-article 
claimants was charged up to the Choctaw Nation West. 

Now, a great deal has been said about why the Mississippi Choctaws 
who claimed under the fourteenth article, if they ever removed to 
Indian Territory, should have no right to claim a portion of the 
annuities of the Choctaw Nation of the West. 

]Mr. Post. Before you reach that point, Mr. Hurley, and while 
you are on this judgment rendered in the Choctaw Nation case, what 
was the real basis of that suit ? 

Mr. Hurley. The basis of the suit is set out specifically in the 
eleventh article of the treaty of 1855, which provided that the 
United States would attempt to settle with the Choctaw Nation 
for all violations of treaty provisions between that nation and the 
United States. 

It was submitted first to the United States Senate. The Senate 
called for an accounting from the Department of the Interior; the 
Senate inade an award in conformity accounting, and paid $250,000 
on the award to the Choctaw Nation. 

In the meantime the Civil War broke out, and the matter was not 
adjusted, but was referred finally in 1881 to the Court of Claims 
for adjudication. The Court of Claims held that the finding of 
the Senate was not conclusive; that the Court of Claims, under its 
jurisdictional act, had a right to try the case de novo, and it did so; 
and in place of finding the nation entitled to recover $2,981,247.50 
it found that it was entitled to recover only $658,122.32 ; the case was 
afterwards appealed to the United States Supreme Court, and the 
nation was awarded the amount which was first awarded by the 
Senate and what was shown to be due them by the statement made 
by the Secretary of the Interior. 

I will go more fully into that now and show what the different 
items in that judgment were recovered for and the amounts of the 
different items charged against the nation, if it is necessary; but 
I have put that statement in the record, and I believe you gentle- 
men have read it; and if not, I will be glad to have you examine me 
on any one of those items. 

Mr. Post. I have read that statement. 

Mr. Hurley. I would like to cover that question in view of what 
Mr. Harrison said, to the effect that the Mississippi Choctaws had 
an equity in the property of the Oklahoma Choctaws, from the fact 
that 4,000,000 acres of their lands were taken to pay for the Okla- 
homa L^nds. 

Mr. KrciL\RDS0N. That was under the treaty of 1830? 

Mr. Post. Yes. 

Mr. Ballinger. Right in that connection, I would like to ask Mr. 
Hurley one question. 

Mr. Hurley. I would like to cover this point, so that it is absolutely 
clear to the committee, before leaving it; and if it is clear I will then 
proceed. 

Mr. Richardson. There is one thing I want to suggest to you, 
Mr. Hurley. In my argument in the relation to this case of the cas^ 



60 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

of the Choctaw Nation r. The United States I placed more stress on 
this fact than on the question of the equities in the funds: If the 
Choctaw Nation recovered $417,000 on account of moneys due 292 
heads of families who were Mississippi Choctaws and administered 
that fund, was not that of itself a recognition by the Choctaw 
Nation that those people had not given up their rights of citizenship, 
but were at that time an integral part of the Choctaw Nation, tem- 
porarily absent from the geographic boundaries of the nation? 

Mr. Hurley. I grant you this, if this is the point you are trj'ing to 
bring out : If those people who attempted to signify their intention to 
claim under the fourteenth article and who were prevented by an un- 
just provision in the act of 1842 — if they could now show that they are 
the descendants of those people who were thus excluded they would 
have had rights as fourteenth-article claimants in the Choctaw Na- 
tion by removing to and establishing a residence in the Choctaw 
Nation within the time required — of course they have not any supe- 
rior rights to the real fourteenth-article claimants. And that was 
considered in the decisions of the commission ; those people were not 
rejected when they made applications for citizenship because they 
had been rejected liy that commission of 1842. As a matter of fact, 
when all of those people, having neither lands nor money in Missis- 
sippi, had an opportunity to get land by going to Indian Territory, 
most, if not all, of them went there and are now enjoying citizenship 
in the Choctaw Nation. There is one point that has been dwelt on by 
Mr. Richardson, Mr. Ballinger, and Mr. Cantwell, and that is this, 
that a great many of those Mississippi Indians did go to Indian Terri- 
tory in 1852 to get the scrip payment. That is part of the $872,000 we 
have been talking about. They read into the record a statement from 
Douglas H. Cooper to the effect that probably two-thirds of those 
Indians, after receiving their scrip payment, returned to Mississippi. 
That may be true. But whenever an Indian claimed under the 
fourteenth article and exercised the privilege reserved to him in that 
article to remove to Indian Territory he thereby exhausted his claim 
as a fourteenth-article claimant. He became a citizen of the Choctaw 
Nation in Indian Territory, and when he then removed out of the 
nation he was the same as any other member of the tribe who went 
into another State; he was no longer a fourteenth-article claimant, 
because in going there to Indian Territory he had exercised the privi- 
lege that had been reserved to him under the fourteenth article, 
namely, to remove to the Indian Territory and there to enjoy the 
privileges of citizenship in the Choctaw Nation. 

]Mr. Post. Suppose he had removed there and was not enrolled as 
a member of the nation and then returned to Mississippi ? 

Mr. Ballinger. That is the precise situation that they found them- 
selves in. 

Mr. Hurley. "Well, the fact is that there were not any enrollments 
by the Choctaws up to the time of the adoption of the constitution ; 
there was not any form for admission to citizenship. They were all 
considered original Choctaws up to that time. 

Mr. Richardson. Suppose one of the Indians went to Indian Ter- 
ritory for the purpose of getting that payment, with no intention of 
becoming a resident or a citizen of the Choctaw Nation, but with an 
intention to return upon receivino- his money to Mississippi. Do 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 61 

you mean to say that a temporary absence from Mississippi for the 
purpose of collecting a certain amount of money would change his 
status ? 

Mr. Hurley. I mean to say that if he did that he intentionally 
violated the spirit of the law that was enacted for his benefit, namely, 
the payment to him of $872,000 in lieu of scrip, on the condition that 
he move to the Choctaw Nation in Indian Territory and establish 
there a residence; if he went there with the intention of deceiving 
the officials who were to pay him and of accepting that money and 
not doing what it was intended he should do — that is, to remain 
there — then he was violating the very law that was enacted for his 
benefit. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Hurley, does not the record in the case of 
the Choctaw Nation v. The United States, volume 2, at page 234, 
show that they did not go to the Choctaw Nation with the intention 
of remaining there, and that they did not conceal their purpose, but 
stated their intention to return, and for that reason they were refused 
payment ? 

Mr. Hurley. I am not prepared to say whether it shows that in 
that form or not; but I am prepared to say that a great many did 
go and did receive the money and did return to Mississippi. Da 
you want the case of the Choctaw v. The United States — the net- 
proceeds case — introduced into this record? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes; the court volumes containing the testi- 
mony. 

Mr. Hurley. I have not the volumes containing the testimony, but 
you will find them at the court. I only have the decision. 

Mr. Ballinger. How many Choctaws entitled to the scrip were 
identified in 1850 or prior thereto? You made the statement that 
there were 4,200, I think. Is that correct ? 

Mr. Post. Something over 3,800. 

Mr. Richardson. One thousand one hundred and fifty-! h roe heads 
of families: 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Chairman, there is no necessity for any con- 
troversy as to the number of persons found to be entitled by that 
commission. I have here House Document No. 898, Sixty-first Con- 
gress, second session, which contains a list of the patentees and 
scripees, and I will ask the committee to allow it to be inserted in 
the record at this place. 

(The matter referred to is as follows:) 

[Mouse Document No. 808, Sixty-first Congress, second session.] 

Department of the Interior, 

Washington, May 6, J910. 

Sir: Referring to the resolution of the House of Representatives, dated April 
19, 1910, in which it was requested that the Secretary of the Interior furnish 
the House of Representatives with certain information concerning INIississippi 
Choctaw Indians, I have the honor to transmit herewith, in compliance with 
said resolution, a list of Mississippi Choctaw Indians who received patents for 
lands under Article XIV of the treaty of September 27, 1830 (7 Stat. L., 333- 
335), and also a list of Mississippi Choctaws in whose behalf scrli) was Issued 
under the provisions of the act of Congress approved August 23, 1842 (5 Stat. 
L., 513), in lieu of the lands to which they were entitled under Article XIV of 
the treaty of 1830 above mentioned. 

In section 2 of the act of Congress of April 26, 1906 (34 Stat. L., 187), it 
was provided that the citizenship rolls of the Five Civilized Tribes should be 



62 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

completed and closed on or before March 4, 1907, and that the Secretary of the 
Interior should have no authority to add any names thereto after that date. 

The records of the department show that on February 1, 1907, there were 
pending for action in the office of the Secretary of the Interior 130 cases involv- 
ing enrollment in the Five Civilized Tribes, of vehich 15 were Mississippi Choc- 
taw cases. 

From February 1, 1907, to March 4, 1907, inclusive, there were received in 
the office of the Secretary of the Interior the records and decisions of the Com- 
missioner to the Five Civilized Tribes in 2,312 cases of enrollment claims in the 
Five Civilized Tribes, of which 75 were Mississippi Choctaw cases, making a 
total of 2,442 cases, including the 90 Mississippi Choctaw cases, examined and 
adjudicated by the department from February 1, 1907, to March 4, 1907, in- 
clusive. 

Of the above 2,442 cases, 2,035 were examined and the decisions rendered therein 
after February 25, 1907, and before the closing of the rolls on March 4, 1907. 
Most of the 90 Mississippi Choctaw cases considered between February 1, 1907, 
and the closing of the rolls were what were known as " consolidatetd cases," 
each involving the claims of more than one family and one of said cases con- 
tained the applications of 888 persons. 

The same consideration was given by the department to the 90 Mississippi 
Choctaw cases as was given to the otiier enrollment cases considered during the 
same period of time. 

Prior to February 9, 1907, it was llie practice, in the cases coming up from the 
Commissioner to the Five Civilizoil Tribes and the Commissioner of Indian 
Affairs, to examine the complete n-cord in each case for the purpose of ascer- 
taining whether the finding of facts contained in the decision of the Commis- 
sioner to the Five Civilized Tribes was in accordance with the evidence, as well 
as to determine whether the interprolation of the law was correct. 

On February 9, 1907, however, tlu' then Secretary of the Interior directed the 
chief of the Indian Territory division, under whose supervision the cases were 
examined nnd the decisions prepared, that, in view of the provisions of section 
2 of the act of April 26, 1906, ho sliould prepare in citizenship cases, with as 
little delay as possible, letters ntliming the decisions of the Commission to 
the Five Civilized Tribes and the commissioner to such tribes, in the absence 
of an adverse recommendation by the Indian Office, when not in conflict with 
the plain provisions of law. accepting the findings of facts of said commission or 
commissioner, and where the question involved in any case was not pending 
before the Assistant Attorney General or the Attorney General. 

A copy of said instructions are inclosed for your information. 

Thereafter the records were not examined as to the evidence in the cases, but 
the finding of the Commissioner to the Five Civilized Tribes as to the facts in 
each case was .nccepted as true, and the question in each case thereafter con- 
sidered in the office of the Secretary was whether the interpretation of the law 
as applied to the found facts contained in the decision of the Commissioner to 
the Five Civilized Tribes was correct. 

As careful cnnsidcrr.tion and as much time was given to each case as it was 
possible to give in view of the number of cases on hand February 1. 1907, 
and the number thereafter received for adjudication, and the limited time re- 
maining in which the adjudication of said cases had to be made. 
A'ery respectfully, 

R. A. Ballinger, Secretary. 

The Speaker of the House of Representatives. 



[Vol. 6, p. 1.".:'., memorandum copies, Indian Territory division.] 

February 9, 1907. 
Chief Indian Territory Division : 

In view of the ]irovision in section 2 of the act of April 20, 1906 (34 Stat., 
137), "that the rolls of the tribes affecied by this act shall be fully completed 
on or before the 4th day of March, 1907, and the Secretary of the Interior 
shall have no jurisdiction to approve the enrollment of any person after said 
date." you are directed to have prepared in citizenship cases, with as little delay 
as possible, letters affirming the decisions of the Commission to the Five Civil- 
ized Tribes and the commissioner to such tribes, in the absence of an adverse 
recommendation by the Indian Office, when not in conflict with the plain pro- 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



63 



visious of law, accepting the findings of facts of said commission or commis- 
sioner, and where the question involved in any case is not pending before the 
Assistant Attorney General or the Attorney General. 
Respectfully, 

E. A. Hitchcock, Secretary. 

List of Ulississippi Choctaw Indians to tchom patents were issued for land under 
the provisions of article 14 of the treaty of Sept. 27, 1830 (7 Stat. L., 
S33-335). 



Patentee. 



Date of patent. 



Remarks. 



A b-be-ho-kah 

Afa-ma-tubbe 

Agnes 

Ah-be-nah-tubbe 

Ah-chee-non-tubbe. . 
Ah-chuk-mah-tubbe. 

Ak-kah-po-tubbe 

Ah-la-mo-tubbe 

Ah-no-sa-cubbe 

Ah-num-po-Iah 

Ah-to-nee 

Ah-to-ble-cha 

Ah-took-lah-ho-nah. . 
Ah-pa-sah-too-nah. . . 

Ah-woon-te-nah 

Ah-wan-to-nah 

Al-la-tah-ho-yo 

Amah 

Anolah 



Jan. 13, 1846 
Sept. 3,1846 
Sept. 9,1846 
Jan. 20,1,846 
Sept. 7, 1846 
Aug. 18,1846 

do 

Dec. 4, 1845 
14, 1846 
24, 1845 

4. 1845 

5. 1846 
4, 1846 



Oct. 
Dec. 
Dec. 
Jan. 
Sept 



Sept. 7, 1846 
Dec. 24,1845 
Mar. 30,1846 
Jan. 13, 1846 
Sept. 3,1846 
Feb. 4, 1857 



A-nok-ae-tubbe . . 
Anthle-Honah. . . 

Asholata 

Aun-ah-che-mah . 

Aun-to-tubbe 

Bah-ne-tubbe 

Beams, Betsey... 



Nov. 
Sept 
Sept, 
Oct. 
Dec 



3, 1837 
4, 1846 
3, 1846 
14,1846 
24, 1845 
Aug. IS, 1846 
Nov. 23,1846 



Bell, Robert 

Bo-le-ho-nah 

Brashears, Alexander. 
Brashears, Delilah 



Dec. 14,1846 
Jan. 5, 1846 
Sept. 17,1841 
Dec. 8, 1842 



Brashears, Rachel 

Brashears, Zadock (commonly called Zadock, jr.) 

Bryant, Louis 

Buchanan, Charles 

Buckles, Betsy 

By-ana 

Cah-mul-le 

Carney, Jeremiah 

Cha-fa-ho-na 

Chanahaio (alias Oake Chanahajo) 

Cha-tambee 

€he-caw (or Che-caugh) 

Che-niah-yo-ka 

Chuck-po-tuljbe 

Christie, W illiam 

Cobb, Samuel 

Con-ehi-hee-tubbe 

Con-na-ho-to-mah 

Coon-oou-tah-t e-inah 

Cun-c-mah-tul)be 

Cun-oon-tani-lje 

Daniel 

Durant, Fisher 

Durant, Pierre 

Durant , R isseze 

E-ah-pil-lah 

Eahambee 

Eahoo-ka-chubbee 

Eha-hah-tomah 

Eia 



Ela-ba-tubbc. 
Ela-ba-tubbe. 
Elah-chubbe. 



June 21 
Mar. 29 
Jan. 29 
Aug. 20 
Feb. 17! 
Feb. 3: 
Jan. 13: 
Apr. 13 
Sept. 3 
Dec. 14 

Sept. 9; 

Jan. 5 

do 

Dec. 28 
Sept. 21 
Mar. 20 
Dec. 5 
Jan. 20 
Oct. 14 
Aug. 18 
Sept. 2 
Apr. 13 
Apr. 12 
May 13 
Dec. 14 
Dec. 24 
Feb. 3: 
Feb. 3 
Oct. 14 
Feb. 3 
Sept. 7 
Dec. 14 
Aug. 18, 



1841 
1842 
1840 
1841 
1838 
1847 
1846 
1848 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 



1,846 
1841 
1,S46 
1845 
1846 
1,846 
1846 
1S46 
1848 
1,848 
1848 
1846 
1845 
1847 
1847 
1846 
1847 
1847 
1846 
1846 



And 2 children over 10 years of age 
and 3 children under 10 years of age 
at date of treaty. 



In her ovm right and to "Vlcey," her 
child over 10 years of age, and to 
"Amy" and "Kitty," her children 
under 10 years of age at date of the 
treaty. 



In her own right and for her 3 chil- 
dren over 10 and her 3 children under 
10 years of age at date of the treaty. 



For himself and for his children. 



64 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Li.s'^ of Misnssipvi Choctaxo Indians to idiom patents were issued, etc.— ConM. 



Patentee. 



Date of patent. 



Ela-pahoka 

Ela-nam-tubbee. 

Eli-o-tubbe 

Eliza 

Emah-ho-to-nah 

Emaiioalona 

E-me-sha 

E-ininta-ham-be 
E-niok-l,ain-be . . 
E-muck-a-to-na. 



Ey-ya-tubbe 

E-ya-la-ko-noh 

Falissa 

Feb-e-mah-ho-nah. 
Fe-lo-ka-chubbe. . . 
Foster, William... 



Garvin, Hem-y 

Garvvin, Benjamin W 



Graham, Susan or Susanna. 



Ha-cubbe 

Ha-la 

Hall, William 

Hancock, Caroline D 

Hancock, .Tubal B 

Hancock, Mary M 

Hancock, William M 

Hardavvay , Hartwell 

Harris 

Heccatambe 

He-o-te-mah 

Hin-o-la 

Hi-a-tubbee 

Hoecalahoma 

Ho-ka 

Hok-la-homa 

Hok-o-lo-chubbe 

Homer, John 

Ilotaiahhona 

Hotah 

Ho-ta-mah 

Ho-te-mah-lah 

Ho-te-mah 

Ho-te-nah-chubbe 

Hotiah, Abbah (otherwise written Hoter). 



Ho-ti-yah 

Ilo-to-mah 

Ho-to-man-ka 

Ho-lubbe 

Hoo-tubbe 

Howell, Calvert (aliad Calvin H.). 

Hoyo 

Ho-yubl)e 

I-am-in-tubbee 

I-ath-le-pah 

I-bah-osh-tah 

lllc-ho-nah 

Im-ah-ho-yo 

Im-ma-no-a-ho-ka 

Im-un-no-ubbe 

I-o-pon-na 

Isaac 

Isha (or .Vyaha) 

Ish-man-tubbe . 



Feb. 

Sept. 

Mar. 

Sept. 

Jan. 

Sept. 

Jan. 

Sept. 

Oct. 

Aug. 



3, 1847 

9, 1846 
30, 1846 

4, 1846 
13,1846 

9, 1846 
13,1846 

8, 1846 
H, 1846 
1271845 



Dec. 21,1837 
Sept. 7,1846 
Sept. 9,1846 
Mar. 30,1846 
Dec. 1, 1845 
June 6, 1844 

July 7,1842 
Aug. 11,1845 

Feb. 7,1846 



Dec. 6, 
Jan. 5, 
June 29, 
June 2S, 
....do.. 
....do.. 
....do.. 
Nov. 23, 
Apr. 13, 
Sept. 9, 
Oct. 14, 

do.. 

Dec. 21, 
Sept. 8, 
Sept. 9, 
Dec. 28, 
Dec. 4, 
June 29, 
Sept. 9, 
Dec. 21, 
Oct. 14, 
Mar. 30, 
Sept. 8, 
Sept. 4, 
Jan. 2, 



1845 
1846 
1841 
1850 



1841 

1848 
1846 
1846 



1837 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1845 
1841 
1S46 
1837 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1851 



Mar. 30, 
Sept. 4, 
Mar. 30, 
Dec. 6, 
Oct. 14, 
May 9, 
Sept. 3, 
Dec. 11, 
July 17, 
Dec. 24, 

do.. 

Sept. 7, 
Jan. 5, 
Mar. 30, 
Jan. 5, 
Dec. 11, 
Feb. 3, 
Dec. 14, 
Mar. 30, 



1846 
1846 
1846 
1845 
1846 
1840 
1846 
1845 
1845 
1845 



1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1845 
1847 
1846 
1846 



Ish-mi-ah do 



Ish-no-ak-ke 

Ish-ta-bo-le 

Ish-te-la-mah 

Ish-tP-o-nah 

Ish-ti-hok-ta 

Ish-tim-e-le-chubbe . 
Ish-tini-lali-horaah . 

Ish-to-niah 

Ish-to-nah 

Ispia 



Jan. 30, 

Oct. 14, 

Aug. 18, 

Mar. 30, 

Jan. 5. 

Mar. 30 

do.. 

Jan. 13 

Mar. 30 

Jan. 2 



1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1840 
1846 



1846 
1846 
184) 



Remarks. 



And to Ko-na-la-hona, Sa-ho-yo, and 
Ta-na-cubbee, her children over 10 
years of age; and E-la-pa-ho-ka, her 
child under 10 years of age at date of 
treaty. 



In his own right and to his 2 children 
underlO years of age at date of treaty. 

For himself and 3 children under 10 
years of age at date of treaty. 

And her child over 10 years of age at 
date of treaty. 



And to her 2 children (1 over 10 years 
and 1 under 10 years of age at date 
of treaty). 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 65 

List of MississiiJpi Choctaiv Indians to whom patents tvere issued, etc. — Contd. 



Patentee. 


Date of patent. 


Remarks. 


Is-te-ubbe. . . . 


Jan. 5,1846 
Dec. 28,1846 
Mar. 30,1846 
Sept. 30,1844 
Dee, 14,1846 
Oct. 10,1842 
Oct. 14,1840 
Sept. 9,1846 
Aug. 11,1845 

do.. 




Is-to-noka 




Jacob 




James, Adam 

Jemmv ... 




Jenkins, Jack 




John . . .' 




Joel 


« 


Johnson, George 




Johnson, Mary 


to S. D. Johnson, 1 of his children. 


Jonas 


Apr. 13,1848 
Aue. 18,1842 
Jan. 5,1846 
Sept. 4,1846 
Dec. 14,1846 
Sept. 4,1840 
Dec. 28,1840 
Dec. 11,1845 
Jan. 12, 1839 
Jan. 5,1846 
Mar. 30,1846 
Jan. 13,1846 
Sept. 8,1846 
Mar. 10,1843 
Apr. 13,1848 
Mar. 30,1840 
Apr. 30,1848 
Oct. 14,1846 
Sept. 8,1846 
Apr. 12,1848 
Apr. 13,1848 
Sept. 3,1846 
June 21,1839 
Apr. 8, 1845 

Mar. 20,1845 
Apr. 8, 1845 

Nov. 18,1851 
Jan. 5,1840 
Dec. 6, 1845 
Aug. 18,1846 
Sept. 4,1840 
Oct. 14,1840 
Apr. 13,1848 
do . 


years of age at date of treaty. 


Jones, John 




Jones, Tennessee 




Kan-che 




Kanoon-tubbe 




TCan-o-to-nah . , , . 




Ko-na-la-ho-na 




Koo-cha 




Labrouse, Mathew 




Lah-bah-tubbe 




Lah-tubbe 




T,ap-pa.-tR-mq.h ... 




Lapissa 




Lishtfoot, William 




Lila 




Low-ah-ho-ka 




Lu-ock-ho-mah . . : 

Lush-ho-min-tubbe 




Machaia 




Mah-la 




Martha 




Matona 

McGilbrv (alias McOilverrv), John 




McGUbry (alias McGilverry), John 


As he had 4 children over 10 years of 
age at date of treaty, instead of 3 
children. 

And to Susie, her child. 

And to his 2 children under 10 years 
of age at date of treaty. 


McGilbry (other\vise called McGilvery), Lucy 

McGilbry (otherwise called McGilvery), Turner.. 

McGilverv, Gordon 


Mfi-Hh-shan-tah . 




Me-ah-she-cubbe 




Me-he-tim-ah 




Me-she-mah 




Me-hah 




Mima 




Min-ta-ham-bee 




Mol-a-tubbe 


Sept. 4,1840 
Dec. 4, 1845 
Oct. 24,1838 
Jan. 29,1840 
Dec. 1,1845 
Mar. 30,1846 
Sept. 2,1846 
do 




Mol-la 




Muncrief, Sampson 




Murphv, George 




Na-con-sha 




Nah-ho-to-nah 




Nail, Benjamin 




Nail, Greenwood L 




Nail, Marccline 


do 




Nelson . . .... 


Sept. 9.1846 
Oct. 14,1846 
Nov. 3,18.37 
Aug. 18,1840 
Dec. 11,1845 
Apr, 13,1848 
July 17,1845 

Dee. 11,1845 
Sept. 8,1840 
Sept. 9,1840 
Jan. 20,1888 
Sept. 2,1846 
Mar. 30,1846 
Jan. 13,1846 
Sept. 7,1846 
Sept. 9,1846 
Jan. 2,1841 
Sept. 8,1846 
Dec. 5, 1845 
Dec. 24,1845 
Mar. 24,1841 
Dec. 14,1846 




No-ah-ho-nah 




No-a-timah 




Nok-e-ne-ham-be 




Nok-o-an-tubbe 




No-que-ah 




No-wah-ho-na 


For herself and for 3 children over 10 




years ol age and 2 children under 10 
years of age at date ol treaty. 


Ogalaima 




Ogleasta 

Ohoya (or Ohoyo Tom) 

O-ka-in-chcek-mah 




Ok-is-tam-beo 




Ok-la-ho-va 

Ok-lah-kah-ho-yo 




Oklanowah 




O-na-ham-be 




Ona-hain-taiah 




Oun-tah-che-ah 

Oxberrv, James 

Pah-lubbe 

88855—15 5 





66 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

List of Mississippi Choctaic Indians to tvhom patents were issued, etc. — Contd. 



Patentee. 



Date of patent, 



Remarks. 



Paneebba 

Paress, Antony or Anthony. 

Pa-sa-chubbe 

Pa-shah-ho-nah 

Peb worth , Henry 

Pe-his-tubbe 

Pe-tah-ah-mah 

Pie-yah , 

Pinson, Betsey 

Pis-ah-ha-mah 

Pish-tah-o-nah 

Riley, Patrick 

Robertson, Lewis 

Sahoyo 

Sa-lah-ma 

Sampson 

Shota 

Sho-tubbe 

Silas 

Shallahohoka 

Sock-a-to-nah 

Socke-tubbe 

Sow-ah-tubbe 

Stabohla (alias Stapolelona). 
Stanton, Allan 



Su-Sa 

Syllin 

Ta-ho-ba 

Tah-ho-pe-ah 

Tah-lah-mo-tubbe 

Tah-te-nah 

Tah-pa-nis-sto-nah-ho-nah . 



Tallawahomibbee . 

Tanacubbee 

Tilly 

Te-he-cubbee 



To-bla-chnbbe 

Toby (alias Tobba), James. 

Toiii, Jim 

Tom, Jack 



Tomahoka 

To-ne 

Took-lah-tubbe 

Tiirnbull, "'illiam. 
Tns-ka-ah-tubbe . . . 

Tiiskiaha 

Tussaka 

Tu-wah-kee 

Tu-wa-tu-cha 



Tu-wa-tu-cha 

Ub-aheni-ah 

T'n-ah-han-tubbe. . . 

Un-ah-tubbe 

Un-ta-hi-o-che 

ITn-tim-ah-ho-nah. . . 

Walker, John 

V'ard, Tobias 

^ya-tubbe 

A'^es-hock-she-homa . 

V'esley 

Ya-ha-mah 

Yem-e-tubbe 

Yem-ma-hubbe 

Yem-o-ho-nah 



Sept. 3,1846 
Oct. 11,1843 
Sept. 2, 1S4G 
Dec. 11,1845 
May 14,1842 
Jan. 20, 184(3 
Au?. 18,1846 
Sept. 7,1846 
.Tuly 2, 1842 
Sept. 2,1846 
Jan. 13,1846 
Oct. 11, 1843 
Sept. 28, 1842 
Dec. 28,1846 
Mar. 10,1843 
Dec. 28,1846 
Sept. 3,1846 
Sept. 4,1846 
Sept. 8,1846 
Dec. 28,1846 
Jan. 20, 1846 
Jan. 13,1846 
Dec. 24,184.5 
Dec. 28,1846 
....do 



Aug. 18,1846 
Sept. 8,1846 
Sept. 7,1846 
Dec. 4, 1845 
Sept. 8,1846 
Jan. 20,1846 
Nov. 23,1846 



Feb. 3, 1847 
Dec. 28,1846 
Sept. 9,1846 
Aug. 12,1845 



Dec. 1,1845 

....do 

Feb. 26,1841 
Apr. 4, 1849 



Sept. 

Mar. 

Oct. 

Oct. 

Oct. 

Dec. 

Dec. 

Oct. 

Mar. 

July 

Dec. 

Sept. 

Jan. 

Dec. 

Sept. 

June 

Sept. 

Dec. 

Sept. 

Feb. 

Sept. 

Dec. 

Sept. 

Sept. 



9, 1846 
30, 1846 
14, 1846 
11,1843 
14, 1846 
14,1846 
28, 1846 
14,1846 
10,1843 

14,1848 

5. 1845 

2. 1846 
13, 1846 

4. 1845 

7. 1846 
29, 1841 

3. 1846 
24, 1845 

3,1846 

3. 1847 
2, 1846 

24, 1845 
2, 1846 
7, 1846 



And to his 2 children under 10 years of 
age at date of treaty. 



In his own right and to Cun-nah-ho-yo- 
E-lah-no-la, and Ona-tubbee, his 
chUdren over 10 years of age, and to 
O-quah-ha-nah and Cun-nah-la-tub- 
bee, his children under 10 years of 
age at date of the treaty. 



And to Hota-tubbee, his chDd over 10 
years of age, and lota-tubbee and 
E-mo-konah, his children under 10 
years of age at date of treaty. 



And to Sinai Tom, Sophia Tom, Levicv 
Tom, and Hamah Tom, his 4 chil- 
dren under 10 years of age at date of 
the treaty. 



Patent surrendered and new patent 
issued Julv 14. 1848. 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TKIBES. 



67 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in v:hose hehalf scrip toas issued under the 
provisions of the act of Congress of August 23, 1842 (5 Stat. L., 513), in lieu 
of land to ivhich they were entitled under article 14 of the treaty of September 
27, 1830 (7 Stat. L., 333-335). 



Anolata. 

Aletisteia. 

Anonitaina. 

Ashahoma. 

Alonesa. 

Anontamla ( or Anotaioub- 

bee). 
Auontona. 
Anointubbee. 
Anatambee. 
Ataiahoua. 
Alamautubbee. 
Alahoma. 
Analutnbbee. 
Alanantubbee. 
Ahotema. 
Akouiotubbee. 
Anocwaatonah. 
Atanahajo. 
Apatubbee. 
AthpotA. 
Antaniba 
Aleisteia. 
Alahotema. 
Anokcheto. 
Apolo-apah. 
Ashatema. 
Akostellatubbee. 
Alcbma. 
Atakohubbee. 
Altona. 
Anahoyo. 
Atabotema. 
Ashahema. 
Alanintubbee. 
Apala hoka. 
Anciibbee (or Ooncub- 

bee). 
Alatahoma. 
Atbtolahoka. 
Anontee-na. 
AUah-bo-te-mah. 
Ah-fah-nio-ah. 
Ab-te-ubbeo. 
Ah-pock-ab-mah-tubbee. 
Ah-tnb-cbubbee. 
Ab-te-iih-la-bo-ka. 
A-o-nab-ba-niab. 
A-low-a-bo-iiah. 
Ah-pock-ar-mah. 
Ah-chali-fab-tnbbee. 
An-no-sn-tiibbee (or Pes- 

sahtubbee). 
A -bou-wa-te-mah. 
Ah-ta-hah. 
A-be-ah-t\]bhee. 
Ah-ne-la-bo-yo. 
Ah-took-ko. 
Ah-po-to-tubbee. 
Ab-no-yo-ka. 
Ah-chah-fab-le-mah, 



Ah-ho-te-mah. 
Ah-lah-ka-tubbee. 
Ah-fah-ruo-ah. 
Ah-no-ab-ka. 
Ab-la-mah-ho-nah. 
Ah-na-sa. 
Ah-no-le-cbe-mab. 
Ab-pok-ab-nan-tubbee. 
Ab-pa-sab. 
Ab-no-lah. 
Ah-lock-ka-cha. 
Ah-to-nubbee. 
Ah-la-cbubbee. 
Ah-to-sboubbee. 
Ah-min-tubbee. 
Ah-pah-lab-bo-uah. 
Ab-lo-co-tiibbee. 
Ab-took-la. 
Ah-pab-tubbee. 
Atb-tubbee. 
Ah-mesa-cubbee. 
Ah-pah-sah-te-mab. 
Ah-mo-gla-tnbbee. 
Ah-cbi-ah-tubbee. 
Ab-be-hnb-tab. 
Ah-sba-la-tnbbee. 
Ab-bo-la-to-nab. 
Ah-cbab-pa-tubby. 
•Ah-nn-ehubbee. 
Ah-no-fa-nubbee. 
Abb;i-bn-nnb. 
Ah-nook-tab-lnbbee. 
Ab-moon-pis-ab-cba 
He-tnck-loo-ab). 
Ah-to-bib. 
Ab-no-ka. 
Ab-to-nan-ka. 
Ah-took-ab-lah. 
Ah-to-no-bam-bee. 
Ab-batb-la. 
Ah-pe sah-tubbee. 
Ab-lo-min-cbiibbee. 
Ab-ma k-ba m-nbbee. 
Ab-no-ab-ha-ciibbee. 
Ah-no-skoo-nah. 
Ab-bo-tu-nah. 
Ah-no-bo-tim-ah. 
An-tini-nh. 
A h-na-b on k-bo-nah. 
Ah-ebuck-ma. 
Al-me-bo-ye. 
Ab-bo-imb. 
Ab-n;i-tiiii-ab. 
Al-nionn-tnbbee. 
Al-e-be-niah. 
Ab-la-che. 
An-nn-tini-ah. 
As-sbe-ap-ki-ka. 
Ah-kab-ne-nbbe. 
Ab-no-le-cbubbe. 



An-tble-no-nah. 
Ah-be-ho-ka. 
Ab-eba ffa-bo-nah. 
Ah-cbe-lab, 
Ah-be-ne-tubbe. 
Ab-moon-to-nab. 
Ah-took-co-la (alias An- 
drew Wier i-e ware). 
Ab-ta ke-ab-ho-nah. 
Ab-isb-tini-ah. 
Ab-bab-ka-tubbee. 
Ab-be-ho-nah. 
An-o-ok-mah. 
Abit-isb-tiah. 
Ah-to-ko-tubbe. 
Al-be-isb-to-nah. 
Ab-che-to-nah. 
Ab-look-liu-tubbee. 
A-mah. 

Ab-no-le-bo-na. 
Ab-cbo-ab-bo-ka. 
Ah-sbn-bo-ka. 
Ab-bab pil-a-ba-ka. 
Ah-kas-te-ma-tubbee. 
Ah-noo-se-bo-nab. 
Ah-to-cbiibbe. 
Ab-fab-moon-tubbee. 
Ah-te-ko-fubbe. 
Ah-nubbe. 
Ab-took-ab-li-ah. 
Ah-he-o-ke. 
Ah-tah-ho-nah. 
(or Ah-lo-me. 
Amah. 

Ah-pe-la-tnbbe. 
Ah-be-tah-tah. 
Atb-la-bo-yubbe. 
Ab-cbe-tubbe. 
Ab-toke-ab-to-nah. 
Ab-che-ab-tubbe. 
Ab-che-bah. 
Ah-mok-Ie-tnbbe. 
Ab-he-kah-bo-nah. 
Ah-yo-mah-te-kah. 
Ab-io-niah-tnbbe. 
Ah-booklin-tubbe. 
Ab-sbal-in-tubbe. 
Ab-nnik-fil-le. 
Ab-lo-ko-tnbbee. 
Ab-took-ln-bo-ka. 
Ab-fa-ko-iiiG-bo-nah. 
An-it-ini-ab. . 
Al-nio-tubbe. 
Ah-bo-la-tiiii-nh. 
Ab-tblup-pik-chi-ah. 
Al-be-bab-tiil)be. 
Al-be-bo-cbi-ah. 
Ab-ki-sah. 
Ab-bo-nab. 
Ah-cbuck-mah-he-ah. 



68 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES, 



Ah-ko-moon-tubbee. 

Ah-look-la-tubbe. 

Ali-ka-ko-tubbe. 

Ah-lo-te-slmbbe. 

Ah-la-chun-ah. 

An-ha-tun-ah. 

Ab-tho-me-ho-nah. 

Ah-e-nah. 

Ah-kah-pul-e-tubbe. 

Ah-to-bo-tubbee. 

An-be-bo-nah. 

Ab-pa-sab-bo-ka. 

Ab-pa -In -bo-nab. 

Ab-t;ib-bo-n:ib. 

Ab-cbe-nb. 

Al-nioon-to-nab. 

Ab-fab-nioon-tubbe. 

Ah-sho-nie-knb. 

Ab-asb-tubbe. 

Ab-no-ab-bnin-bee. 

Asb-ba -cam-bee. 

Ab-ba-to-iiab. 

Ab-no-sa. 

Ab-be-ne-tubbe. 

Al-be-bo-nab. 

Ab-to-la-te-mah. 

Ab-tnb-le-bo-nab. 

Ah-chiah. 

Ab-cba b-a b- tiibbee. 

Ab-w;ib-te-ab. 

An-tnbbe. 

Ab-lo-sho-mo-tubbe. 

Ah-bo-te-iinh. 

Al-be-te-ab. 

Ab-tab-le-ab. 

Ab-noo-toni-be. 

Ah-nook-wnb-ab-too-nah. 

Ab-ta h-be-le-bo-nah. 

Ab-to-catcb-a. 

Ab-unk-fa-la. 

Ah-no-nb-tn-cnbbe. 

Ab-e-o-ka -tim-a h. 

Ah-pe-le-tubbe. 

Ab-cbe-ah-ho-nah. 

Ab-to-iio-bo-nab. 

Ab-pa la-bo-nah. 

Ab-no-ah-tam-be. 

Abbe-to-ble-tubbe. 

An-iik-fil-le-te-mah. 

Ab-it-is-te-ab. 

Ab-sbn-cbin-;ib. 

Ah-le-ho-ka, 

Ah-tnbbe. 

Ah-ne-bo-te-mah. 

Ab-pis-vsal-la. 

Ab-bo-yo. 

Ab-nii-yah. 

Ab-cba-pa-ho-nah. 

Ab-sbe-lab. 

Ab-pa -sa -ta m-he. 

Ab-bi-cbe. 

Ab-wa-clie-bo-nah. 

Ab-piik-yo hvibbee. 

Ab-be-isb-ti-yab. 

Atuk-lam-be. 



Ah-pab-lab-bo-nab. 

Ab-it-ti-yah. 

Ab-fab-mab. 

Ab-fa-ko-ma-to-nah. 

Ab-cbuk-nia-tubbe. 

Ab-took-bi-bo-inah. 

Ab-uo-1 a -bo-nab. 

Ab-koo-cbun-(ubbe. 

Ab-ebe-le-tab. 

Ab-cbo-niab-kab. 

Ab-lo-Diab. 

Ab-be-bo-nab. 

Ab-lab-nab-tubbe. 

Ab-no-ab-tubbe. 

Ah-took-la-tiibbee. 

Ab-n ook-we-a b-cbe. 

Ab-ka-cbe-bo-nah. 

Ab-nuok-lab. 

Ab-lo-uja b-tnbbe. 

Ab-to-hi. 

Ab-cba-fo-tubbe. 

Ah-cbe-lab. 

Ab-pa -sa-bo-nah. 

Ab-nook-fille. 

Ab-ue-po-tubbe. 

Ab-it-ik-ab-ue-wah. 

Ab-pa-san-tubbe. 

Ah-fa-ko-nie. 

Ah-cba-le-tah. 

Ah-che-ah. 

Ah-pe-bih. 

Ab-cba -f o-bo-uah. 

Ah-nook-fille-hoka. 

AJi-ne-boon-tubbe. 

Ab-cbe-to-nab. 

Ab-hak-po-tubbe. 

Ash-tubbe. 

Ahe-min-tnbbe. 

Ah-fa-no-tubbe. 

Ab-cba-po-tubbe. 

Ab-nook-we-ah. 

Ab-no-sa-tnbbe. 

Ab-po-to-be. 

An-cba-to-nab. 

Ab-no-la-tnl)be. 

Ab-pa-sa-bo-nah. 

Ah-no-si. 

An-tubbe. 

Abbe-took-cbi-ah. 

Ab-cbe-ab-so-nab. 

Ab-took-li-nb. 

Al-a-te-mab. 

Ah-nook-fil-la. 

Ah-nook-buiu-ab. 

Ab-lo-nin b-bo-nah. 

Ab-cbnk-nio-bo-yo. 

Ah-cbe-ab. 

An -tab-bo-nab. 

Ah-look-le-tubbe. 

Ath-ta-lam-la. 

An-ta-te-niab. 

Ab-noon-tubbe. 

Ab-took-lan-tubbe. 

Abbe-neen-tubbe. 

Al-noon-tubbe. 



Ab-cba -kab-hoo-nah. 

An-chok-to-nubbe. 

Ah-tbe-ho-nah. 

Ab-pa-sah-bo-ka. 

Ali-no-si. 

Ab-fa-nia-bo-ka. 

Ab-uook-cba-mah-ho-nah. 

Al-be-cbef-fah. 

Ab-cbe-ubbe. 

Ab-no-]a-bam-bee. 

Ab-wa-cbe-bo-nab. 

Ab-waJi-cbe (alias 

Ah-wab-cbe-bo-nah) . 
Ab-nook-cbe-to. 
Atb-ko-la. 
Ah-tab-sbe-nab (alias 

Hasb-tab-sbo-nah ) . 
Ab-po-tubbe. 
Ab-boni-lab. 
Al-moon-tubbe (or 

Oon-a n-cba -tubbe ) . 
Ab-man-to-nab. 
Ab-pok-a-mab. 
Ab-took-a b-la n-tubbe. 
Asb-ka-nia. 
Ali-be-ti-ab-bo-ka. 
Ab-yo-ah-bo-nab. 
Abbe (or Ah-uab-be). 
An-an-to-mab. 
Ah-ne-be-nnb. 
Ah-chab-le-bo-nah. 
Ab-f um-a b-took-a-lo. 
Ab-to-ga-te-mab. 
Ah-ne-be-mab. 
Ab-nook-we-ubbe. 
Ah-pa-lah-to-nah. 
Ah-toog-la-he-nah. 
Ab-le-ho-tonah. 
Ah-to-ble-cba. 
Asb-cbin-tiibbe. 
Ash-te-ab-bo-nah. 
Ab-cbi-ab. 
Ah-cbin-tubbe. 
Ab-cbnck-mab-tubbe. 
Abbe-bo-yo. 
Ash-ho-nah. 
Ab-wa n-tubbe. 
Ah-po-to-le. 
Ah-took-a b-lan-tubbe. 
Ah-la-mah-bo-mah. 
Ah-man-tubbee. 
Al-o-nia-cba. 
Ab-pe-ba b-t u bbe. 
Ab-cbuck-misb-tubbe. 
Ab-no-ba. 
Ab-to-be-tubbe. 
Ab-no-la-cbe-mah. 
Ab-took-ah-lab. 
Ah-cbuck-mab-to- tubbe. 
Ab-to-kab. 
Ab-take-a b-te-mah. 
Ab-to-bab-tubbe. 
Ab-pis-ta-ka-tubbee. 
An-tah-ba -mah. 
Ami-yah (or Emi-yah>. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



69 



Ah-wa-tu-nah. 

Ah-to-lah-tubbe. 

Ah-che-to-uah. 

Ah-chick-mah-ho-nah. 

Ah-lo-wa-tubbe. 

Ah-huni-nie. 

Al-be-tl-yah. 

Ah-po-la-chubbe. 

Ash-wak-tubbe. 

Ah-ho-nah. 

Ah-ca-no-tubbe. 

Ah-cbe-toma. 

Ah-che-le-tubbe. 

Ah-cho-ah. 

Ah-no-wa b-tubbe. 

Ah-moon-ti-yab. 

Ah-cbuk-ma b-to-ka-tubbe. 

Ah-onk-tim-ah. 

Ah-oon-tam-be. 

Ah-tuk-ln-ine-bo-nab. 

Ab-ba-tam-be. 

Ah-ta-bubbe. 

Ah-bo-yo-tubbe. 

Ah-bo-gla-cba. 

Al-is. 

Ah-cba-fon-tubbe. 

Ab-pa-snu-tubbe. 

Ah-be-cbunk-tah. 

Ah-cha-uan-tubbe. 

Ab-pa-saiu-la (orPa-sam- 

lee). 
Ah-bo-nab. 
Ab-fab-nah. 
Ab-fun-ne. 
Ah-pul-e-cbubbe. 
Ah-bo-ka. 
Ab-kab-nie-zubbe. 
Ah-cah-lnb-bonubbe. 
Ah-pa-nam-tim. 
Ah-cbuf-fab-take-ubbe. 
Ab-chunk-ma-bo-ka. 
Ab-po-la (or Big Billy). 
Ab-nook-cbin-to. 
Ab-pa-sa-ka. 
Ah-tbe-o-hubbe. 
Ah-ka-na-la-tubbe. 
An-ta-ho-na. 
Allice. 
Ab-to-ko-ah. 
Al tb-to-ca-bo-nah, 
Ah-cbuk-a-la. 
Ab-ca n-non-tnbbe. 
Ah le-noon-tubbe. 
Ah mo-te-ah. 
Ah-pab-ta-tubbe. 
Ab-be-bo-ka. 
Ah-pa-kah-tubbe. 
Al-ca-in-ta. 
A-num-brilla. 
Ak-an-nbbe. 
A-che-ho-ka. 
Atigustln. 
Ala-ti-ya (alias Ho-le- 

te-a). 
A-be-ha-ya. 
Ah-nook-fa-lah. 
Ah-to-sho-tubbe. 



Ah-pa-bab (alias Johny 

Walk). 
Ah-pis-ah-te-mab. 
Ah-nah-bo-te-uab. 
Ah-inin-tubbe. 
Ah-no-sa-cubbe (orNo-sa- 

cubbe). 
Ah-cba-cau-tubbe. 
Ab-lab-ho-ka. 
Ah-pa-lab-bo-uab. 
Ah-laJi-tii-mah. 
Ah-pa-san-tnbbe. 
Ah-took-ah-lah-him-ah. 
An-a-in-ta. 
At-ta-tam-ca. 
An-ti-kubbe. 
A-to-ui-ciibbee. 
A-cba-i-a-tubbe. 
An-ti-cub-kubbee. 
Ah-be-bat-tab. 
Ah-fo-kab-tnbbe. 
Ah-ne-te-mab. 
An-ok-cbe-to. 
Ab-a-wa-la. 
A-po-la-tubbee. 
Achi-a. 
Al-a-la-ko-la. 
Asb-o-nio-ta. 
A-hatb-la. 
Anna. 
A-ya-to-na. 
Ah-o-la-ta. 
Ab-la-ha-ma. 
Al-a-te-ma. 
Ano-la-bo-na (alias Yiu- 

ma-ne-la ) . 
A-cha-la. 
Ab-be-eoo-cbab. 
An-tble-hiibbe. 
A ns-coon-la -tnbbe 
Ah-tuk-la-uie-bo-nah. 
A h-cbo-nian-tubbe. 
Asb-tubbe. 
An-tu-nab. 
Aush-tiibbe. 
Ab-hi-o-tubbe. 
Ab-chuck-a-la-mah. 
A-bu-ta. 
Amos. 

An-nn-tubbe. 
Ah-fa-koma. 
Al-it-o-nah. 

Bun-na-ho-na. 
Bo-lebo-na (alias To-lo- 

le-ho-na ) . 
BInia. 
Butab. 

Bling-a-tubbe. 
Ba-niaha. 
Beck-y. 
Bi-a-ta. 
Bil-la. 

Bab-fo-cubbe. 
Bab-pbs-sah. 
Be-lin-go-nah. 
Beckey. 



Bun-na-chubbe. 

Bah-sa. 

Be-lin-kat-tah. 

Be-nab. 

Be-nan-cba-ho-ka. 

Bah-fun-kab. 

Ben. 

Bun-ah-tu-nab. 

Bimi-ab-t:ib-ka (orTik-be- 

ubbe), 
Becka. 
Bessy. 

Buch-ah-bono. 
Be-nan-ebe. 
Bah-la bo-nab. 
Bah-bo-te-uab. 
Bab-te-nab. 
Bah-ah-nubbe. 
Bo-la. 

Bah-na-tnbbe. 
Ba-ho-nab. 
Ba-ba-ka. 
Bab-ka-tubbe. 
Be-nin-tnbbe. 
Bah-nubbe. 
Bell David. 
Basey. 
Becky. 
Bu-niah. 
Bat-sey. 

Be-lin-go-nab-gobn. 
Bah-nah-tiibbee. 
Bab-tnbbee. 
Bah-ua-cbe. 
Be-na-tani-le. 
Boh-tubbe. 
Boh-cha-lah. 
Bi-o-frlab. 
Bo-ha-le. 
Bah-na-tnbbee. 
Bob Captain (aliasMingo- 

ho-nah). 
Belink-at-tah. 

Can-a-ho-YO. 

Chompah. 

Cbe-mo-na. 

Chickasa. 

Cnn-nea-bo-na. 

Cnn-nea-tubbee. 

Charles. 

Con-sba-tnbbee. 

Cbis-be-ho-nia (alias 

Capt. Red Post Oak). 
Conani-o-niobba. 
Chonk-choo. 
Can-on-e-ta-la. 
Cun-ne-a-tubbee. 
Choui-pa. 
Chok-nia-be-ma. 
Can-cbe-te-ma. 
Cimnani-an-tiibbee. 
Can-eha-to-na. 
Cbll-le-tani-la. 
Can-cha-bo-ka. 
Chonnis. 
Chuffa-to-na. 



70 



ENKOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVIIIZED TEIBES. 



Can-pa-lubbee. 

Che-hoiu-bee. 

Co-cha-tubbee. 

Cuu-ua-cha. 

Cun-ne-chubbee. 

Cah-to-nali. 

Che-no-lah. 

Charles. 

Cbuffa-ta-no-la. 

Co-lick. 

Cim-ne-chubbe. 

Cah-Ia-tubbee. 

Cnn-ne-ubbee. 

Ciin-ne-ah-tubbe. 

Cab-la-tubbee. 

Cun-ne-o-nab. 

Cim-ne-ah. 

Chuffa-tubbee. 

Cun-ah-he-mah. 

Carson. 

Cah-to-nah. 

Com-pal-tubbee. 

Cou-noou-taui-lee. 

Chamis. 

Cun-ne-ish-to-nah. 

Charles. 

Cah-la-bo-iia. 

Cun-ne-che-nah. 

Cnn-a-la-to-nah. 

Cun-ne-mo-nubbee. 

Ce-lia. 

Cun-ne-iibbee. 

Cun-na-see. 

Cnn-ne-ho-cbubbee. 

Co-cbiibbee. 

Cun-noon-ta-mah-ho-nah. 

Cun-noon-tah-eubbee. 

Cun-noon-tah-cnbbee. 

Creesay. 

Cuu-ne-ta m-bee. 

Con-cbe-te-mah. 

Cbab-ley. 

Ciin-no-nia-tubbee. 

Cus-cahtick lah (or Yock- 

a-na-bo-mah). 
Cbille-tab. 
Cun-na -mam-lee. 
Chin-sab. 

Cun-noon-tab-cbubbee. 
Chum-tab. 
Cun-ah-ha-mah. 
Cni)-e-niani-la. 
Cun-e-mah-tim-ah. 
Cun-un-tah-lee. 
Can-un-tah-mah. 
Cuu-e-nbbe. 
Cnn-e-mam-lee. 
Cun-e-me-yubbe. 
Co-ah-ho-mah. 
Cun-e-uiah. 
Chaffa-to-nubbe. 
Cnn-e-o-te-kah. 
Che-kah. 

Cuu-e-ma h-ho-nah. 
Chin-alle. 
Chille. 



Captain Bob (or Mingo- 

houia ) . 
Che-ma-ho-ka. 
Co-tab. 
Chal-le. 
Chak-al-e-che. 
Cuu-e-te-mah. 
Con-cheto-nab. 
Che-po-lah. 
Chah-hnbbe. 
Cun-e-ish-tu-nah. 
Cun-e-o-te-mah. 
Can-e-tam-le. 
Chul-le. 

Coon-oon-tan-te-mah. 
Cim-uoou-to-mah-Ia-ho-ka. 
Chah-ah-tubbe. 
Con-ah-la-chubbe. 
Che-ho-nah. 
Chum-pah-te-mah. 
Ciin-ue-mah-chubbe. 
Che-ho-te-mah. 
Cnn-ubbe. 
Chuf-ah-tam-be. 
Con-che-ho-ka. 
Cun-e-mah-tim-ah. 
Cun-ah-min-chubbe. 
Chane. 

Cun-e-mo-nubbe. 
Chan-le. 

Cun-e-me-tim-ah. 
Cun-u-ta-cubbe. 
Con-she-ho-yo. 
Chef-fa-to-nah. 
Charles. 
Chit-o-kubbe. 
Chif-fa-ti-yah. 
Chuf-fa-ho-ka. 
Chook-mam-le. 
Cha-le-ho-uah. 
Chaf-ubbe. 
Cheffa-to-nah. 
Che-co-tubbe. 
Cha-wah-te-ah. 
Chick-a-mah. 
Chef-fa-to-no-wah. 
Cha-lan-tah. 
Chick-a-sah-ho-ka. 
Chef-fo-ti-yah. 
Cho-ho-ka (or Ah-chu- 

wah ) . 
Che-mah. 
Chuk-fy-noo-sa. 
Chil-le-tam-be. 
Cbuf-fa-tu-nubbe. 
Chef-fa-ho-ka. 
Chick-oon-tubbee. 
Chif-fo-ti-ya. 
Chuf-fa-tubbee. 
Chef-fa h-hin-lubbe. 
Cun-ne-tam-be. 
Che-lok-kee. 
Chiclv-e-mah-ho-yo. 
Chum-pah-te-mah. 
Can-o-me-tubbe. 
Cun-e-ah-he-mah. 



Cun-e-ah-hok-tah. 

Cun-e-moon-tubbe. 

Cou-oon-te-ma h-homah. 

Cum-un-mubbee. 

Cun-e-ah-ston-ah. 

Cousin. 

Con-ah-Ia-cha. 

Con-sha-lah. 

Cun-oun-tam-be. 

Cun-e-mah-tubbee. 

Con-e-moon-tubbee. 

Con-sha-ho-ka. 

Cun-e-mo-nubbee. 

Choom-pah. 

Chum-pah-ho-ka. 

Chah-e-te-mah. 

Cun-ne-ah-ho-nah. 

Con-che-tou-nah. 

Chum-pah-te-mah. 

Cun-e-o-to-nah. 

Cun-ne-te-nah. 

Che-cah-ta. 

Cah-po-Ia. 

Chick-a-sha. 

Che-mi-o-ka. 

Cut-tah-ho-chubbee. 

Che-ah. 

Chief-fah-tam-lee. 

Cun-ue-tubbe. 

Cun-ne-o-to-nah. 

Chubbee. 

Chah-la. 

Com-pa-lubbee. 

Cnn-ne-ta m-bee. 

Cut-a-po-la. 

Chik-mah-em-ah-tubbee. 

Cun-e-me-to-nah. 

Cole-Coleman. 

Colbert. 

Cham-a-ha-jo. 

Che-po-ka. 

Cah-te-mah. 

Cha-fahn-to-nah. 

Can-cha-ho-nah (or Tan- 

cha-ho-nah). 
Cuffah-lva. 
Cun-ne-mah. 
Co-chubbee. 
Cun-oon-ta-mah. 
Cun-oon-ta-bee. 
Che-ni-la-ho-ka. 
Con-o-he-mah. 
Con-sha-ho-nah. 
Cun-oou-ta-kah. 
Chuf-fa-tubbee. 
Che-ho-a-to-ua. 
Cha-cha. 
Cha-co-nubbee. 
Co-cha-tam-co. 
Carson (or Ka-chi-en). 
Cluif-fa-ta-no-la. 
Cham-pa -ya (or Sham- 

pi-a). 
Choom-pa-ho-ka. 
Chuffa-tubbee. 
Cobb Pickens. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 



71 



Cobb Auy. 

Cobb Molly. 

Chuffa-to-ke-ubbe. 

Cbook-ab-tal-le. 

Cnsh-o-uah. 

Cbil-le-ta. 

Cim-oou-tick-cah. 

Ciine-uie-tim-ab. 

Chok-tah-ho-ma (or Pls- 

it-ti-yah ) . 
Cbas-po-bo-nab. 
Che-mah-le-ho-ka. 
Cut-te-o-to-mah. 
Ciui-ne-rue-ubbe. 
Caleb Jobn. 
Con-sbe-bo-ka. 
Cole, Colbert. 
Cole. Johu. 
Cole, Augustin. 

Dyer, Lucinda. 
Dyer, Nelly. 
Dyer, Jeremiah. 
David. 
Dixon. 
Davis. . 
Deunis. 

Durant. Pierre. 
Durant, George. 
Duraut, Vina. 
Durant. Sylvester. 
Durant. Jefferson. 
Durant, Isbani. 
Durant, Sophia. 
Durant, Charles. 
Dyer, Polly. 

E-o-ta. 

E-mait-cha-tubbee. 

Esteeupunna-koka. 

E-la-ho-yo-ta-nia. 

E-mach-o-nubba. 

Em-a-la. 

E-niam ba. 

E-la-to-nubbee. 

E-li-che-to. 

Ea-to-na. 

Een-puk-a-nubbee. 

Eli-lubbee. 

Ea-lsh-ya. 

E-niutb-pa-sa-lubbee. 

E-me-she-ho-na. 

E3-lo-tu-ne. 

Ema-ho-na. 

E-yo-ko-tubbee. 

E-laah a ho-na. 

Eli-an-ne-ho-nah. 

E-n-cbub-bee. 

E-a-han-tubbee. 

E-man-o-a-tubbee. 

Ea-ho-na. 

E-la-is-te-ma. 

E-la-cha. 

E-ma-ho-na. 

E-lah-ho-te-mah. 

E-lah-so-quah. 

E-yok-a-ma-tubbee. 



E-niock-mabn-tubbee. 

Eho-ah-to-nali. 

Eab-la-ho-nah. 

E-ho-yo. 

E-ah-bo-ke-ta. 

E]mah-bo-kah. 

E-lah-nioon-tubbee. 

E-a-mock-in-tubbee. 

E-mo-mah-bo-ka. 

E-ah-ho-nah. 

Eah-ho-nubbee. 

E-nian-te-a b-ho-ka. 

E-ah-chubbee. 

E-lam-bee. 

E-ah-tubbee. 

E-o-tubbee. 

E-lab-nubbee. 

E-low-e-te-niah. 

El-yosh-moon-tubbee. 

E-o-nah. 

E-coffe-tubbee. 

E-ah-ha-cubbe. 

E-o-kah-tubbe. 

E-o-kab-tubbe. 

E-mak-ko-nubbe. 

E-lah-ho-to-nah. 

E-lu-nah-tubbe. 

E-me-la-chubbe. 

E-misb-toe-nah. 

E-lah-e-sbubbe. 

E-lo-nab. 

E-o-tim-ah. 

E~la-yo-kak-tubbe. 

E-mi-ah-tubbe. 

E-niath-la-cubbe. 

E-la-pe-ah. 

Ela-pe-sa-ho-ka. 

E-le-ah-ho-nah. 

E-lah-pnn-ah-ho-yo. 

E-la-pam-le. 

E-mah-yah-ste-mah. 

E-lah-took-am-be. 

E-la-po-nubbe. 

E-la-ho-tubbe. 

Em-ma-le-bo-ka. 

E-la-ho-ta-ka. 

E-le-ho-yo. 

E-ok-tam-bee. 

E-niith-lubbe. 

E-mish-ah-ho-nah. 

E-ah-ho-fbnbbe. 

E-lu-nubbe. 

Eah-kiah-ho-ka. 

E-ah-bo-nab. 

E-lap-o-tim-ab. 

E-niale-le. 

E-lab-bo-tini-ah. 

E-lab-u-kah. 

E-ca-we-che. 

E-lab-pish-te-ah. 

E-lah-ho-ka. 

E-lah-in-ini-ah. 

E-ah-bo-ka -tubbe. 

E-yak-o-tubbe. 

E-lah-tam-be. 

Eah-to-chubbe. 

E-ah-ho-kah-tubbe. 



E-lah-ne-bo-nah. 

E-glen-ubbe. 

E-lu-nah-tubbe. 

E-le-no-ah-cbubbe. 

E-ab-tah-ah-ho-mah. 

E-le-mah-bo-nah (or La- 

mah-bo-nah). 
E-mo-nubbe. 
E-lah-u-kah. 
E-cab-le-ho-nah. 
E-li-o-te-ka. 
E-klen-ah-tah (or E-glen- 

ah-tubbe). 
E-ah-ho-ka. 
E-ki-o-nubbe. 
E-lah-ha-cubbe (or Il-ah- 

he-kah). 
E-ah-to-nah. 
E-li-o-te-mah. 
E-lap-no-wah. 
E-ah-ho-nnbbee. 
E-ah-ho-tim-ah. 
E-li-yubbe. 
E-yal-a-ho-ka. 
E-la-pa-subbe. 
E-la-lo-ma-tubbe. 
E-lah-ho-nah. 
E-mab-to-kah. 
E-le-ab-tubbe. 
E-la-cha-te-niah. 
E-ah-he-tubbe. 
E-ha-la-to-nah. 
E-la-ho-te-niah. 
E-me-la-to-nah. 
E-mock-he-tubbe. 
E-lah-lie-kah (alias E-la- 

ha-cubbe). 
E-ab-tubbe. 
E-ho-ah-to-nah. 
E-la-pe-wah-ho-nah. 
E-ma-che-nh-ho-nah. 
Eah-eah-tini-ah. 
E-lah-fe-tu-nah. 
E-ah-to-nah. 
E-ah-an-tubbe. 
E-lah-tah-tubbe. 
E-as-tu-ubbe. 
Eli-pipa. 
E-oh-tah. 
E-ah-ha -tubbe. 
E-lah-pah-nubbe. 
E-ah-le-ho-tim-ah. 
E-Cah-tah. 
E-lap-in-tubbe. 
E-yah-ab-to-nah. 
E-ia-sbubbe (or Billy N- 

kon-Sbaw). 
E-ya-ka -tubbe. 
E-mish-te-ubba. 
E-nio-nubbe. 
E-ne-cun-e-ubbe. 
E-yah-hubbe. 
E-cha-pn h-ho-nah. 
E-lah-ho-yubbe. 
E-mack-lubbe. 
E-li-che-tubbe. 
E-mah-tall-ah. 



72 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



E-mah-sha. 

E-li-chuf-cubbe. 

E-rue-ha. 

E-chji-i)o-tubbe. 

E-lo-ok-cbi-ab. 

Emo-nubbe (alias Im-mo- 

mibbe). 
E-lan-tubbe. 
E-mah-no-wab. 
E-mab-bo-to-nah. 
E-sba-bo-ka. 
E3-lah-tab-to-nab. 
E-ho-ab-tubbe. 
E-lab-be-nubbe. 
Edmund. 
E-yak-tubbe. 
E-yah-be-tubbe. 
E-misb-tubbe. 
Elah-pab-ne. 
E-lab-pis-ubbe. 
E-le-o-nab. 
E-Iab-pe-kab. 
E-yab-isb-to-nab. 
E-cbab-pab. 
E-lo-ma-bim-mah. 
E-ab-bam-be. 
E-lah-tnbbe. 
E-lab-bo-yubbe. 
E-mah-a-lubbe. 
E-yak-a-che. 
E-li-bo-kubbe. 
Esta-bo-yo. 
E-lah-lo-nia-tubbe. 
E-cba-po-tubbe. 
E-lan-to-nah. 
E-as-ta-bo-nab. 
E-bak-ah-tubbe. 
E-yab-tu-nab. 
E-mi-ya-tubbe. 
E-mo-na-bo-ka. 
Ey-ab-li-yab. 
E-lak-cbe-te- mab. 
E-li-yubbee. 
E-bab-took-lah. 
E-lab-o-tubbe. 
E-ah-ho-nubbe . 
E-yan-to-bo-ka. 
E-hib-po-cbubbe. 
E-min-te-bo-nah. 
E-lab-be-mab. 
E-la-bo-te-ab. 
E-ab-bo-nubbe. 
E-lah-pisb-ti-yah. 
Este-mll-le. 
E-yak-a-tubbe. 
E-yi-bo-yo. 
E-yab-bab-tubbe. 
E inal-bo-mah (alias E- 

mab-Ie-bo-mah). 
E-mab-tam-bee. 
E-lab-ko-tubbe. 
E-lab-ke-niah. 
E-lab-te-ubbe. 
E-lah-bo-yo. 
E-ll-to-nubbe. 
E-ya-le. 
E-ah-tom-bee. 



E-li-cbin-tubbe. 

E-li-be-nubbe. 

E-la-ba-cubbee. 

E-lap-no-au-tubbe. 

E-lab-cbe-bo-nab. 

E-yab-bam-bee. 

E-ah-bo-ka-te-mab. 

Eliee. 

E-sba-to-nab. 

E-bu-e-te-tubbe. 

E-ab-cah-to-nah (or Cah- 

to-nab). 
E-mis-tubbe. 
E-ab-bo-t;e-mah. 
E-ruan-cbe. 
E-me-to-bo-nah. 
E-mo-no-la-cbo-nab. 
E-bo-ab-tam-be. 
E-le-o-ka-te-mab. 
E-lab-yo-kab-to-nab. 
E-ab-bam-bee. 
E-lo-mab. 
E-lab-pisb-ah. 
E-ca h-no-ab-bo-nah. 
E-ah-ho-ka. 
E-lab-to-nab. 
E-mam-be 
E-niab. 
E-lo-nab. 
E-yab-bam-ba. 
E-bl-o-cubbee. 
E-man-cba. 
E-mab-nln-che. 
E-yak-ki-ah. 
E-yab-bam-ba. 
E-bam-bee. 
E-ma-cba-tubbe. 
Eli-cba-tubbe. 
E-lab-pa-ah. 
E-liza. 
E-mab. 
E-li-tubbe. 
E-lab-e-mab. 
E-lo-yab-tubbe. 
E-lik-bou-ab. 
E-lah-pio-ubbe. 
Em-bo-tab. 
E-ah-te-mab. 
E-o-kab-tubbe. 
E-cba-po-tubbe. 
E-li-an-ne-bo-nah. 
Ex-ab-kab-bo-tubbe. 
E-lam-bee. 
E-mab-lab-te. 
E-no-wab. 

E-bim-ma b-la-tubbe. 
E-ab-sba-tubbee. 
E-lah-bo-yo-bo-nah. 
E-ah-lo-bo-nab. 
E-lo-mon-to-cubbee. 
E-me-le. 
E-li-za. 

Eab-cbe-bubbe. 
E-lah-tim-ab. 
E-o-cutcb-ab. 
E-chab-pah. 
E-mah-shab-cbubbe. 



E-ab-bam-bee. 

E-lah-pe-ab-bo-nah. 

E-mab-om-be. 

E-te-pok-a-nah. 

E-meen-tab-bo-nah. 

E-li-oon-ab. 

E-lab-tubbe. 

E-lap-lk-e-bah. 

E-yon-tab. 

B-mipab. 

E-mo-tbab-tubbe. 

E-li-o-te-mab. 

E-lan-tubbe (or Tlsh-o- 

pi-a). 
E-a-ebubbe. 
E-la-ba-lu-ta. 
E-lo-ni-ab. 
E-lo-ho-ka. 
E-liza. 

E-mo-na-tubbe. 
E-o ca-tubbe-to-nah (or 

To-cubbe). 
E-wbab-to-nab. 
E-ab-kab-tubbe. 
E-lah-ma-tubbe. 
E-la-ba-cubbe. 
E-la-te-mah. 
E-mab-lubbe. 
E-ah-tabn-tubbe. 
E-ab-ki-ab-to-nab. 
E-ab-bo-nubbe. 
E-li-o-nubbee. 
Eatamla Cbarles. 
E-miMa. 
E-la-bo-tema. 
E-lan-tubbe. 
E-la-ta-i-ho-na. 
Ea-isb-tubbe. 
E-matb-lo-la. 
Een-ta-ho-ka. 
E-ma-lubbee. 
E-no-ka. 
E-li-za. 

E3-lo-wa-tubbe. 
Eliza 

E-la-took-e-la. 
E-lo-ma-cbubbe. 
Ei-la-pa-nubbe. 
Elijab. 
Ellen 
E-o-tah. 
E-lab-pam-la. 
E-lab-we-tubbe. 
E-ye-me-tubbe. 
E-loom-ah-bo-kah. 
E3-ll-emah. 
E-lah-pa-lubbe. 
E-no-wab, 
E-me-le-bubbe. 
E-la-u-ka-tubbe. 
E-lab-pun-te-mah. 
E-me-la-bo-na. 

Faya. 
Fannubbe 
Falle-cheto. 
Fal-a-min-cbubbee. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



73 



Fe-nia-la. 

Fa-uubbee 

Fe-tlck-ah-chubbe. 

Fil-e-ah-tubbe. 

Fo-kab-lin-tubbe. 

Fe-temah-ti-niah. 

Fe-le-kah. 

Fal-ah-moon-tubbe. 

Fe-le-nubbe. 

Fe-le-tab. 

Fe-lak;i-tubbe. 

Fil-e-ab-tim-ah. 

Fo-ko-lin-tubbe. 

Fah-hab-mab-bo-nah. 

Full-o-mo-tubbe. 

Fil-e-mam-le. 

Fal-lal-mocn-tubbe. 

Ful-Ie-bo-niab, 

Fun-ne-bo-mab. 

Fa-la-moou-tubbe. 

Fil-e-ti-yab. 

Fe-lah-moon-tubbe. 

Fil-e-tubbe. 

Fo-look-a-cbe. 

Fisb-o-bo-cubbe. 

Fo-le-na-te-mab. 

Fa-lam-e-tubbe. 

Fl8h-u. 

Fil-e-cutcb-e. 

Fa-lam-a-tubbe. 

Fal-am-a-tubbe. 

Fal-am-ab-bo-ka. 

Fil-e-tab-bo-nab. 

Fal-ab-mo-tubbe. 

FlUe-moou-tubbe. 

Fallo-ab-bam-be. 

Fil-e-mab. 

Fil-e-to-nab. 

Fe-le-moon-tubbe. 

Fe-lem-e-tubbe. 

Fin-min-tubbe. 

Fille-tab. 

Fut-cba. 

Fil-le-ca-tubbe. 

Fille-man-tiibbe. 

Fab-lab-mab. 

Fan-e-iibbe. 

Fo-lub-be-cbubbe. 

Fo-look-a-cbe. 

FItcb-lk-no-wab. 

Flsb-ab-be-lubbe. 

Fab-Iam-bee. 

Fillubbee. 

Fil-e-mon-e-ti-ma. 

Fil-e-mab-tubbe. 

Fa-lo-mab. 

Fee-cbubbe. 

Foster, Tbomas W. 

Foster, George H. 

Foster, Elija G. 

Frazer, Sweeny. 

Fo-ca-tubbee. 

George. 
Gibson. 

Go-ma-cbubbee. 
Gibson. 
Gowin, Betsey. 



Hol-la-cbee. 

Him-mo-ka-to-na. 

Hoya (orAboya). 

Hotbma. 

Ha-ma-yo-lubbee. 

Hotb-ta-ma. 

Hok-a-tubbe. 

Ha-o-cbo. 

Hillubbee. 

Hoy-e-ta-na. 

Hoyo-bo-tiibbee. 

Higb-i-bo-na. 

Hol-la-cbubbee. 

Hem-a-cbe-na. 

Ho-pa-ka-cbe. 

Hus-be-Mingo. 

Ho-ka-lo-cbe. 

Ho-te-ma-ta. 

Ho-ti-a-ka. 

Ho-te-mo-na-bo-ka. 

Hul-tuk-bo-ma. 

Hollab. 

Hi-a-ca-to-na. 

Han-nubbee. 

Hia-cutcb-ee (orHi-yo-ca- 

cbee). 
Ho-ta-cubbee. 
Ho-but-a-ka. 
Hi-a-tubbee. 
Ho-te-o-a. 
Ho-let-tab-bo-nah. 
Ho-te-na b-cb ubbee. 
Hi-ack-co-nubbee. 
Hick-a-tom-bee. 
Hi-a-la. 
Hal-la. 
Ho-cbe-fo. 
Ho-te-mab. 
Hop-pa-la-tubbee. 
He-ne-a b-bo-uab. 
Ho-to-man-cba. 
Ho-ta. 

Ho-tab-bo-nab. 
Ho-tam-bee. 
Ho-lab-tubbee. 
Han-nab. 
Ho-ba-cubbee, 
Hitb-ab. 
Ho-cubbee. 
H i m-niock-ab-bee. 
Hi-ab-la-bo-mab. 
Ho-te-man-cbubbee. 
Ha-cbah. 
Ho-pa-na. 
Ho-gla. 
Ha-cho-na. 
Hick-a-te-mah. 
Ho-tan-te-ni-ah. 
Hl-o-tab. 
Ha-la. 

Ho-te-nubbee. 
Ho-to-nah. 
Ha-cubbee. 
Hl-o-te-niab. 
Hun-o-nab-tubbee. 
Ho-pl-ab. 
Ho-te-ab. 
Ho-bab-cba-bo-nah. 



Ho-te-ab-bo-nab. 

Ho-yo-pa-tubbe. 

He-kab-tubbee. 

Ha-cba. 

Ho-cbubbe. 

Ho-nab. 

Ho-ta-cbe-bo-nah. 

Ho-lima. 

Hab-tak-lam-ab. 

Hock-la -bo-nab. 

Hun-nubbe. 

Ho-tim-ab, 

Ho-ta b-at-tubbe. 

He-kab-tubbe. 

Ha-le-tubbe. 

Hi-ouu-nbbe. 

Ho-Ia b-ba b-bo-nab . 

He-kab-ti-mab. 

Ho-tan-yab. 

Ho-tisb-tam-be. 

Ho-tisb-im-ab. 

Ha-ka-a-bo-mab. 

Hal-le. 

He-kak-ti-mab. 

Hok-la-bo-nab. 

Ha-o-le-tim-ab. 

Ho-tim-e-ab. 

Hah-tak-ubbe. 

Ha-tick-lilla. 

Ho-tik-ia. 

Ho-tab-tab. 

Hi-ne-ubbe. 

He-cubbe. 

Ho-te-ab. 

He-u-ab-le-tubbe. 

Ho-to-nab. 

Ho-ne-tam-be. 

Hol-ba-tubbe. 

Ho-ne-mab. 

He-nab-bo-mah. 

Hook-e-la. 

Hi-ab-ka-tubbe. 

Hatb-la. 

Hi-o-tubbe. 

Ho-yo-bo-nab. 

Hool-lo. 

Ho-ka. 

Ho-cba. 

Ho-te-mi-ab. 

Hon-oon-tam-ba. 

Hi-ab-ka-tubbe. 

Hi-e-le-bo-nab. 

Ha-lubbe. 

Ho-tim-ab-cbe. 

Ha-la -cbe. 

Ho-te-an-ab. 

Hota-tini-ab. 

Ho-lis-ab-tubbe. 

Ho-yo-ubbe. 

He-cballe. 

Ho-pak-o-nah. 

Ho-te-ab. 

Hik-it-e-ab-bo-nab. 

Ho-tin-lubbe. 

Ho-yo. 

Hon-ah-bo-tubbee. 

Hab-be-nah. 

Ho-yo-nubbe. 



74 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 



Ho-bah-ta m-tubbe. 

Hok-e-lo-tnbbe. 

Ha-took-liibbe. 

Ho-te-tubbe. 

Hnsh-e-ho-ruab. 

Hi-vo-la. 

Hol-le. 

Hi-een-ah-tubbe. 

Ho-le-ti-ah. 

Holla-ti-yab. 

Hok-lo-tiibbe. 

Ho-bab-to-m:ih. 

Ho-tan-tu-nah. 

Hi-o-to-nab. 

Ho-te-mab. 

Hill-a-tubbe. 

Ho-lis-so-bo-nah. 

Hos-to-no-che. 

Hio-gale. 

Hi-yab-kubbe. 

Ho-cbubbe. 

Han-tubbe. 

Hiisb-sbook-bo-mah. 

Ho-te-mab. 

He-kab-tubbe. 

Ho-te-mab. 

Hu s-ke-a b-booc-ta. 

Heo-te-mab. 

He-lubbe. 

Ho-yubbe. 

Hnb-la-le. 

Ho-te-nab. 

Hool-bab-tubbe. 

Hushe-te-mab. 

Hok-sa-gee. 

Hi-yok-ab. 

Hi-ape-ha-sa. 

Ho-pi-yab. 

Hoo-sab-tubbe. 

Hoo-cbe-mah. 

Hei tb-lah-tbo-nah. 

Ho-tiibbe. 

Ho-mok-o-nubbe. 

Ho-to-pab-le. 

Hotb-te-nubbe. 

Ho-be-ti-yab. 

Hin-cbe. 

Ho-te-kubbe. 

Hotb-te-nubbe. 

Ho-tubbe. 

Ho-pab-ka-ho-nah. 

Hnsb-book-bo-nah. 

Hi-tuke-pa-ho-ma 

Yak-i-ab). 
Husb-e-no-wab. 
Hl-em-e-te-mah. 
Hi-o-tubbe. 
Hi-a-lee. 
Ho-yubbe. 
Hasb-ab-i-ta-nab. 
Hi-a-lee. 
He-ki-yuable. 
Ho-te-nab. 
Hl-en-e-cbubbe. 
Hah-mook-la-bo-nah. 
Ho-cbon-cbubbe. 
Ho-pa-bin-tubbe. 



Ho-tish-le-ah. 
Ho-te-yab. 
Ho-te-uiah. 
Ho-yo-bo-uab. 
Hoy-ubbe. 
Hi-ak-ab. 
He-yape-ab-ba-jo. 
Hi-yak-bubbe. 
Ho-cbe-fo-tubbe. 
Hol-la-bo-uab. 
Han-ab-to-uab. 
Hi-ab-co-nubbe. 
He-no-nab-tubbe. 
Hool-bab-tnbbe. 
Ho-nab. 
Ha-ba-nah. 
Ho-nah. 

Ho-pab-ka-tubbe. 
Ho-lab-cba. 
Ho-lab. 
Ham-bee. 
Ho-ni-o-nnbbee. 
Ho-te-mab. 
Ho-yo-an-tubbe. 
Hau-ab-mock-ah-yah. 
Ho-to-ak-ab. 
Ho-tab-bo-nab. 
HoD-to-nah. 
Ho-lab-te-mah. 
Hoo-nab. 
Ho-me-bo-tubbe. 
Ho-bab-tam-bee. 
Hab-nubbee. 
Hi-ak-e-tubbee. 
Han-nubbe. 
Hool-bab-bo-nah. 
Hik-e-yah. 
Ho-nah. 
Hi-ab-ka-tubbe. 
He-lubbe. 
Ha-man-ehe. 
Ho-kubbe. 
Hik-ab-cbe. 
Him-ab-ubbe. 
He-ka-cbe-bo-nab. 
He-ab-ka-isb-to-nah. 
Ho-ka. 

Hun-nuk-ubbe. 
Ho-ba-tubbe. 
Him-niock-am-bee. 
Ho-te-mab. 
Hi-a-to-nab. 
(or Ho-yo-pab. 
Ho-ta-bo-nab. 
Ho-tab-lab-ba-mab. 
Ho-le-ba-cbubbee. 
Ho-che-nah. 
Ha-ta-mah-bo-nah. 
Ho-ka. 

Ho-te-na b-bo-nah. 
Ho-pab-kab. 
Ho-pi-ab-tubbe. 
Ho-sbin-sbe-bo-mah. 
Ho-yo-pa. 
Ho-e-o-na. 
He-a-ka-ti-na. 
Hotcb-a-ka. 



Ho-ba-te-I-a. 

Ha-tubbee. 

Hob-tab. 

Hi-ab-ko-nubbe. 

Hi-ab-ka-mah-tubbe. 

Ho-le-to-pab. 

Ho-ta-cubbe. 

Hick-a-tubbe. 

Ho-yo-ka. 

Ho-to-nah. 

Hetty. 

Ho-te-mab. 

Ho-pi-ab-ho-mah. 

Ho-uo-que-ab. 

Hun-oon-pab. 

Ho-pab-cubbe. 

Ho-chab. 

Hong-ki-o. 

Ha-cubbe. 

Hoth-te-ma-bo-yo. 

Hotb-te-ma-ho-yo. 

Ho-ma-a-cbe. 

Hik-in-tubbe. 

Hick-a-tubbe. 

Ha-yo-pa. 

Hali-son. 

Ha-to-na. 

Ho-ba-tisb-ubbe. 

Ho-ti-kab. 

Hok-ta. 

Ho-ka-lo-tubbe. 

Husb - to - nubbee ( alias 

Ae-ma-to-cubbe, alias 

0-gle-isb-ti-a). 
Ho-yo-bo-nubbee. 
Ho-lin. 
Ho-na-cbi-to. 
Ho-cba. 
Ho-cba. 
Ho-te-ock-a. 
Ho-yo. 
Hol-la. 
Ho-e-ho-nab. 
He-ke-a b-bo-nah. 
He-kab. 
Ho-ba-te-yah. 
Ho-to-nah. 
Ho-cbubbe. 
Ha-mook-lab-tubbe. 
He-to-nah. 
Ho-te-mi-ah. 
Ho-yubbee. 
Ho-tam-bee. 
He-in-tim-ah. 
Hoo-too-nah. 
Hoo-la-te-i-a. 
Hock-lo-hatt-ah. 
Ho-ba-lah. 
Ho-yo-ki-ah. 
Hock-a-la-tubbee. 
Hasb-ta-sho-nab. 

Is-te-a-ka-ia-ho-na. 

Is-tam-ba. 

Is-tilla-bala-tubbee. 

la-ma. 

Is-ti-e-a-tubbe. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



75 



Ish-kumma. 
Is-taru-ba-la-bee. 
I«tn-pe-ca-nubbee. 
Isb-te-mei-a-uubbee. 
Is-tam-cha. 
Is-tim-a-la-ho-na. 
Is-o-gla - te- ma (alias 
Oclatema - Im - mil - o - 
bo-na ) . 
Is-tam-tubbee. 
Ish-tam-yab. 
I-ubbee. 
Is-tam-to-na. 
Is-ta-ho-la. 
Iste-man-cba-ho-na. 
I-o-wa-che. 
Ick-a-na. 
Im-iibbee. 
I-a-tubbee. 
Im-misb-to-nah. 
I-a-mah. 
I-siim. 

Ish-a-tubbee. 
I-sim. 

Isb-te-mahn-a-cbubbee. 
Im-mab-la-bubbee. 
Im-mi-e-bo-to-nah. 
I-ah-nin-tubbee. 
Isb-wa-cbubbee. 

I-to-tubbee. 
Ish-to-mab-bo-nah. 

Ini-sey. 

Im-mocb-fo-quab-tubbee. 

Ish-ton-te-mab. 

Ick-netb-lo. 

I-a-bubbee. 

Ish-tlm-a-so-yo. 

Im-mab-tba-cbubbe. 

Is-UD-mab. 

I-o-glab-tubbe (or Hus- 
tuk). 

I-a-mab. 

Illa-bo-nab. 

Isb-ta-ka. 

Ooos-ta. 

Isb-ta-ho-nah. 

Isb-sbam-bee. 

I-ortb-la. 

Illa-bo-ka. 

Illa-glab-to-nab. 

I-a-mab. 

Ish-te-lah-mab. 

Isb-wah-ki-yo. 

Isb-te-mab-ka. 

I-con-nah. 

Im-mab-no-wab-bo-nab. 

Im-mock-kab-bo-nah. 

lo-pun-na-cbubbee. 

Ini-mish-ti-yab. 

I-o-ke-a-to-nab. 

Isb-tab-sbubbee. 

Isb-tab-lab. 

Im-me-bo-ba-tubbee. 

Isb-to-mablone-chubbee. 

Ista-min-cha-tubbee (or 
Mincha). 

Im-mah-lah-te-mah. 



Illa-con-a-tnbbee. 

I-ok-lo-tubbe. 

I-e-ne-tim-ab. 

In-pak-nab-bo-nab. 

Im-ab-illa. 

lye-le-be-mab (or I-la-bo- 

nab). 
Isaac. 
Im-my. 

Ik-o-nah-te-mab. 
Isb-te-ah-bo-nab. 
Ish-te-lab-ue. 
Isb-tab-bo-va-bo-nah. 
Im-ab-le-ho-nah. 
Isb-lab-bo-ka. 
Isb-ta-mab-bo-nab. 
It-a-pe-sab. 
Isb-te-mi-ab. 
In-lab-tim-ah. 
Im-al-to-va. 
Im-e-lnbbe. 
Ish-te-mab. 
Isb-to-me. 
Is-tubbe-battab. 
Isb-tu-nah-tubbe. 
Isb-ta-ab-ho-nab. 
Isb-tabo-nab. 
lo-ka-to-nab. 
Im-pun-ah. 
Is-sbau-ke-bo-yo. 
Isb-bo-ni-ye. 
Ish-tubhe-bo-ka. 
Im-an-o-tik-a. 
Isb-tan-we-cbe. 
Im-ab-bo-nab. 
Isb-to-nab-cbe-bo-nab. 
In-lah-tubbe. 
Im-om-ubbe. 
Isb-tab-lnbbe. 
Im-ab-bo-yo. 
Illa-bo-yubbe. 
lush-kain-ab. 
Isb-tal-atb-i-ab. 
Ish-tal-lab-bo-nab. 
Im-ab-bo-ka. 

Is-bo-ka (or Atb-le-bo-ka ) . 
Ish-tab-yo-co-nab. 
In-am-be. 
I-yo-nab. 
Isb-pab-lab-te. 
Im-ah-tisb-e-bo-nah. 
Isb-im-ab-bo-ka. 
Isb-te-nii-o-nab. 
In-lab-to-nab. 
Im-pim-ab. 
Ish-ti-ah. 
Ish-tani-nio. 
Ish-te-me-le-bo-ka. 
Isb-ti-ab. 
I-atb-le-pah. 
Im-ab-le-honab. 
Isb-ta-lubbe. 
Isb-te-mi-ah-bo-ka. 
Is-te-cbe. 
In-lab-bo-iiab. 
I-ab-che-bo-nab. 
Im-ah-tab-bo-nab. 



Isb-to-ni-ye. 

Isb-tem-bo-la. 

Im-uk-tab-nubbe. 

lUe-tubbe. 

Im-ab-cbi-ab. 

Isb-mi-ab-ho-nab. 

Is-sta-cba. 

Isb-ton-ok-eu-ab (or Ish. 

tou-ab-kue-ab, or Nok- 

we-ab). 
I-yok-e-tiibbe. 
Isb-un-ab-bo-ka. 
Im-mab. 
I-e-ab-bo-nah. 
Im-bo-ah-to-nab. 
Im-i-e-ab-ba-tubbe. 
Isb-to-ka-ho-tim-ab. 
Isb-te-me-lubbe. 
Isb-bo-yo. 
Im-ok-po-to-tubbe, 
Isb-tubbe. 
Ik-io-ne-nab. 
Isb-ta-lo-la-tubbe. 
Is-tubbe. 
Isb-no-wab. 
Isaac. 

In-lab-cnbbee. 
Isb-ab-bok-ta. 
Im-ab-bo-yo. 
Isb-tab-bam-me. 
Ish-ta-uek-la. 
I-tun-la-tubbe. 
Is-te-me-cbubbe. 
Im-ab-no-ab-tim-ab. 
Ish-tab-tubbee (or Big 

Jacob). 
Is-til-i-ab-bo-ka. 
Isb-ti-o-pa. 
I-yo-co-nubbe. 
Isb-te-ab-bo-ka. 
Im-al-tah-bo-nah. 
I-ok-la. 

Isb-tab-book-tah. 
Isb-tab-tubbe. 
Isb-ti-ab. 
Il-ab-cbaf-fubbe. 
I-a-nab. 

Im-utb-ta-ha-to-nah, 
Isb-li-vab. 
I-o-ko-nnbbe. 
I-map-kaii-che. 
Itte-bo-mis-tiibbe. 
Im-mo-nubbe. 
Illah-isb-te-iuab. 
It-ta-mitb-ubbe. 
Im-me-bo-nab. 
I-tu-nah. 
It-ah-ho-bo. 
Isb-me-ab. 
Ib-ab-no-wab. 
lu-cbuk-mab-bo-yo. 
I-bak-ab-bul)be. 
I-lab-yo-knbbe. 
I-ha-kon-bee. 
lUab-no-la. 
Iha-gab-tubbe. 
Isb-te-ma-bo-uab. 



76 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



In-too-lah. 

I-ba-kah-tuhbe. 

I-lap-ini-hah. 

Ini-nh-talle. 

I-ape-ah-tnbbe. 

I-ik-len-ah. 

I-yo-ke-nubbe. 

I-hik-e-tubbee. 

I-mnt-te-ah. 

I-ok-Cbe-lio-ka. 

Im-ab-yab. 

I-eni-nia. 

In-tii-la-bo-ka. 

Isb-to-pah-mibbe. 

I-lap-o-nab. 

Ish-tan-te-mah. 

Ish-ko-cbubbe. 

I-o-pa-cbee. 

Isb-la-ho-ka. 

Ish-ta-bo-la. 

Im-o-na-ho-ka. 

I-it-tn-lab. 

Isb-te-niak-ah. 

Ik-tab-te-mah. 

Ish-te-mi-yah. 

Ish-te-rua. 

It-e-lak-na. 

Ik-be-tnbbe. 

Il-ab-ish-to-nah. 

Isb-tik-ab-tubbe. 

In-sha-la-tubbe. 

Io-yab-bnl)be. 

I-yab. 

Isb-tah-pak-niah. 

I-ask-ka-mah. 

Il-le-bo-ka. 

I-oatb-ab. 

Il-ab-e-mab. 

Ini-ish-too-nah. 

I-in-ah-tha-kah. 

Ini-ab-i-sba. 

I-m-niil-le. 

Ik-la n-ab-tab. 

Ini-isb-le-ah. 

I-a-cbe-bo-nah. 

Isb-ti-o-nah. 

I-hool-bah-tnbbee. 

I-lah-bo-tubbe. 

I-hi-o-tnbbe. 

I-lab-ba-bo-to-nab. 

I-bab-wa-che. 

Il-ab-isb-te-niab. 

I-een-la-bubbe. 

I-o-ga-be. 

I-o-knbbe. 

I-sbam. 

Isk-te-kubbe. 

T-ha-ne-ubbe. 

It-e-ok-cbak-ko. 

Ish-tab-bo-bo-tubbe. 

I-yo-mab-bo-ka. 

I-o-gle-te-mab. 

Ish tab-bo-cubbe. 

Ish-te-mab-le-cbubbe. 

I-yo-nah-te-rnah. 

Ish-tah-bo-nah. 



I-lik-e-tiibbee. 

I-al-ba. 

Isb-tan-tnbbe. 

In-tah-bnbbe. 

Iiu-ah-no-wabbe. 

Ish-tal-lah. 

In-lab-tiibbe. 

Ish-tah-tubbe. 

Is-te-mi-o-nah. 

Isb-tesb-tan-be. 

I-yo-nan-te-nah. 

Isb-tab-bo-nah. 

Ik-ham-ab. 

I-atb-le-pah. 

Isb-tan-to-nah. 

Ish-ta-ne-mah-tubbe. 

I-orth-lab. 

I-yo-ko-mab. 

Tsb-ta-beni-ab. 

I-e-ton-lah. 

Isb-te-uiab-bo-nab. 

I-ma tb-pis-a-tam-be. 

Isb-bo-ya. 

Ish-tah-a-niah. 

Isb-tab-be-mah. 

Ish-tah-ab-bo-mah. 

I-tin-lab-bim-ab. 

Is-cbaf-nbbe. 

I-yo-lab. 

Ish-tab-bo-nab. 

Isb-ton-tiii-ab. 

I-kab-po-liibbee. 

Im-me-bo-ka. 

I-an-ta-tnbbe. 

Jsb-tab-bo-nab. 

Isb-ti-o-klu. 

Ik-bm-nbbe. 

Ish-to-bo-yo. 

I-o-bon-nbbe. 

Isb-ten-eab-to-nah. 

Ik-len-ab. 

Isb-to-nan-obi. 

Isb-pab-na. 

Ish-tini-nii-bo-ya. 

Isb-a-bo-nab. 

lo-ka-cbnbbee. 

Il-la-con-nab-tnbbe. 

Ish-tin-nio-na-obnbbee. 

I-co-mab. 

Tm-ubbee. 

Im-ninon-tubhee. 

Ik-ko-iiab-bo-nab. 

Il-la-mo-to-nab. 

Im-inab-bo-nab. 

ina-bo-obnbbee. 

Im-il-le. 

Ini-ab-bo-tonab. 

Is-tim-a b-ba ni-be. 

I-o-pan-iibbe. 

In-ab-lnbbo. 

In-isb-tam-be. 

Isb-to-nie-ba b-tubbe. 

I-it-ab-mibbe. 

Iru-ab-to-nab. 

I-ok-lo-bnbbe. 

In-no-tubbe. 



Ish-ta-bo-lubbe. 

I-wa-t«-nab. 

I-ah-ka-bo-fbe. 

I-yo-bo-nab. 

Iin-ah-no-le-bam-be. 

It-e-mi-ya- (or Man-ya). 

I-yo-wa. 

Isb-te-cbubbe. 

Il-le-no-wa. 

Isb-no-wa. 

Ini-ma-no-le-ho-yo. 

Is-stubbee. 

Im-po-nab. 

Im-mogla-cbubbe (or O- 

glab-cbubbe). 
Im-me-yab-bo-nah. 
Im-mo-nah-bo-ka- (alias 

Na-wa). 
Im-pi-ab. 
I-o-mab. 
I-o-gla. 

Isb-tim-mab-la. 
I-a-min-tab-bo-ka. 
Isb-ta-ab-ba-cubbe. 
Ini-mab-sbo-mah. 
Il-la-cbe. 
Isb-tab-bo-pah. 
Isb-tab-liibbe. 
It-tab-low-ecbah. 
Im-mo-na b-to-na b. 
Im-mo-na-tubbe. 
Ish-te-mab. 
Isb-tabn-tah. 
Im-mab-tiyab. 
Isb-ti-a-iuab. 
I-a-nab. 
Im-nie-sba. 
Isb-tab-bo-we-cha. 
Isb-stantbly. 
Is-te-me-1-a. . 
Im-mo-na -bo-yo. 
I-cba. 
Im-ma-to-bo-bo-na (or A- 

to-ba ) . 
Im-mab-sah-che. 
Is-ton-a-ka. 
I-o-glah. 

Ick-g] en-a -bee-cba. 
Isb-te-ma bo-nab. 
Il-ie-o-tubbe. 
Im-al-to-bab. 
Im-ab-lab-bo-nab. 
I-o-koon-ab. 
Ik-be-bn-nab. 
Im-mab-na-cbnbbee. 
Im-mis-te-mab. 
I-mab-pi-sab-timah. 
I-mab-tab. 
I-o-ka. 
I-o-a-bo-ma. 
Illab-payn-to-nab (or To- 

nab). 
I-ab-bo-to-nah. 
Isb-te-mab. 
I-la-tnbbe. 
I-o-ma. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



77 



Jackson. 

Jack (jiliiis Oua-lubbee) 

Joshua. 

Jones, Jenuy. 

Joel. 

Jolin. 

John. 

John-im-niey. 

Jackson. 

Josephus. 

Jipie. 

Jackson. 

Jep. 

Jefferson. 

Josey. 

Jum-pah (or Chum pah). 

Johny. 

Jake. 

Jinny. , 

Jose. 

Jim. 

Joses. 

Johny. 

John. 

Jepe. 

Jim-Tom. 

John. 

Jinny. 

Jackson. 

Jones, Levi. 

James. 

Kan-she-ho-to-ma. 

Kan-cha. 

Kunnea. 

Ke-yo-cubbe. 

Kon-the-tubbe. 

Kan-oon-tubbe. 

Kon-che-ho-ka. 

Kan-oon-tubbe. 

Kan-che-to-nubbe. 

Kon-che-tam-be. 

Kun-e-moon-tubbe. 

Kom-pil-lah. 

Kon-e-toon-tubbe. 

Kou-che-ti-ah. 

Kan-che-ti-ah. 

Kan-oon-ta-tubbe. 

Kan-oon-ubbe. 

Kon-me-mah-ubbe. 

Kon-oon-tah-tubbe. 

Ko-tah. 

Ka-chubbe. 

Kls-ah-nah. 

Kon-che-tubbe. 

Kan-an-ren-tin-tubbe. 

Kem-ish-to-nah. 

Kam-pa-lubbe. 

Kooch-abbe. 

Ko-mubbe. 

Kan-che-le. 

Kun-ne-ahto-nah. 

Ka-ne-tim-be. 

Kun-nal-le-tubbe. 

Kan-cha-tubbe. 

Kan-che-ma-ha. 

Kah-ne-tah. 



Ko-nan-chubbe. 

Ka-tha-ho-nah. 

Kan-che-tam-be. 

Kah-no-ma-ho-nah. 

Kis-tubbe. 

Kan-che. 

Kuu-ne-ah-ho-nah. 

Koos-ta-na. 

Knt-tah-hah. 

Kah-il-le. 

Ka-tubbe. 

Kah-non-te-uhbe. 

Kanche-ho-ka. 

Kun-e-tah-ho-nah. 

Kah-po-tubbe. 

Ke-ille. 

Kun-ne-a-tubbe. 

Kam-pe-tubbe. 

Ka-to-nah. 

Kah-tam-bee. 

Ka-yu-hubbe. 

Kush-oon-an-che-hubbe. 

Kun-ne-ah-ho-nah. 

Ka-ha-le-ho-nah. 

Ko-bah-tom-bee. 

Kal-so-tah. 

Kush-ah-nam-bee. 

Ke-lis-ta. 

Kah-lo-tubbe. 

Kik-e-te-mah. 

Ke-yo-ho-nah. 

Kan-ah-to-nah. 

Kun-e-mah-ho-nah. 

Kush-oon-a-mus-tubbe. 

Ka-yo-he-mah. 

Kal-po-tubbe. 

Koo-chubbe. 

Ka-o-cubbe. 

Kun-e-tom-be. 

Kam-pillah. 

Kam-pilla. 

Kon-lvah-noos-ko-bo. 

Kush-oon-a n-cha-ha-ba . 

Ko-noo-tubbe. 

Kun-e-ah-to-nah. 

Ke-ah-na-chubbe. 

Ko-tah. 

Kan - sho - nun - she-hubbe 

(or Billy John). 
Kun-ne-ah-ho-nah. 
Ka-no-yo-he-kubbe. 
Koo-tah. 
Kan-cha-tom-la. 
Kan-che. 
Kuth-lee-lee. 
Kun-e-an-che-ha-la. 
Kun-ah-ho-tubbe. 
Ko-na-chubbe. 
Ka-le-ho-na. 
Ko-ke-i-a. 
Ka-o-tubbe. 
Ko-chubbee. 
Kan-a-ho-te-ma. 
Kish-u-mus-tubbe (or Ka- 

lubboe). 
Kon-che-ho-nah. 
Ka-sa. 



Ke-ka. 

Kan-alle. 

Koo-cha-tiyah. 

Kan-che-ho-nah. 

Kah-no-me-he-mah. 

Kush-ah-hooc-ta. 

Kun-o-te-ma. 

Kurney, Charles, 

Kon-e-moon-tah. 

Ken-che-to-ah. 

Kearney, Creesay. 

Kearney, Wilson. 

Kearney, Josephus. 

La-pin-tubbe. 

Lewis. 

Loma. 

Look-fan-cha. 

Laris. 

Lo-sho-ma. 

Lushta. 

Lo-ka. 

Lo-mo-ka. 

La-pa-sa. 

Lo-mah-ka. 

Li-la. 

Lis-mah. 

Li-la. 

Lah-sa. 

La-man. 

Lah-pah-ho-nah. 

Lucy. 

Lo-ma. 

Low-ch-te-mah. 

La-sho-mah. 

La-mah. 

Ll-za. 

Lah-sa. 

Lah-po-ka. 

Lo-ma h-ta-ka. 

Lah-pa h-te-mah. 

Lush-pam-le. 

Look-o-la-tubbe. 

La-po-te-mah. 

Le-ah-ho-nah. 

Lo-man-to-nah. 

Lucy. 

Lo-sho-mah. 

La-mali-ho-nah. 

Lo-nia-tubbe (alias E-la- 

lo-ma-tubbe). 
Lo-mah. 

I^a h-wah-ho-nah. 
Lo-ko-tam-be. 
Lo-sho-na. 
Low-ah-tubbe. 
Lah-ta-kah (or Tom 

Billy). 
Lo-ho-no-tubbe. 
Low-wa-tubbe. 
Loo-sa. 

Lali-ha-nubbe. 
Lo-mah-to-nah. 
Lap-ah-la. 
Lo-mah. 

Lah-i)a-sa-ho-nah. 
Lah-habbe. 



78 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



Lash-pah. 

Lah-n;i h-che-ho-nah. 

La-sho-nia. 

Le-neah-ho-nah. 

Low-ah-che. 

Lah-niah-ha-cubbe. 

Lap-oon-ah-hah. 

Lo-niuh. 

Low-a-chubbe. 

Low-um-che. 

Lo-ina. 

Lah-pahn-la. 

Lo-mah-ho-shul-bee. 

La-fah-tah. 

Li-wea. 

Lewis. 

Lo-mah-tubbee. 

Le-ah-ho-ka. 

Lah-pah-rua-tu-mah. 

Lucy. 

Lo-wa-to-na. 

Lo-wa-ho-ka. 

Lo-nia-ho-na. 

La-ho-na. 

Lo-wa. 

Lnb-bee. 

Lirea Ann. 

Loma-ka. 

Lovie. 

Lo-mah. 

La-ti-ma-sha. 

Low-a-tam-ba. 

La-sin. 

Li-la. 

La-i-e-ma-ho-ua, 

La-pa-ta-uia. 

Lah-ma. 

La-pish-no-wah. 

Loo-ak-isb-tubbe. 

Lap-ab-bove-ta. 

Lali-pim-a-bo-ka. 

I.a-pa-chubbee. 

Lucy. 

Lo-\va-tubbe. 

Low-in-cha. 

La-po-nubbee. 

Ma-ba-to-ua (or Waha- 

toua). 
Molly. 

;Min-ta-ho-to-na. 
Manc-che. 
Mou-in-tubbe. 
Min-te-nubbe. 
Ma k-kee-lia-to-na. 
Ma-al-e-he-ma. 
Mut-ta-ho-na. 
Mul-tubbee. 
Mal-cbo-na. 
Mon-to-na. 
Mal-a-ke-tubbe. 
Mach-ca-bo-na. 
Man-sha-tubbee. 
Ma-bubbee. 
Ma-to-na (alias Ona-to- 

na). 
Me-hi-a-te-na. 



Ma-ho-la-tubbee. 

Me-ah-te-ubbe. 

M-le-ab. 

Mal-le-te-ab. 

Me-ab-tubbee. 

Mi-yab. 

Mo-min-tubbee. 

Mock-an-tubbee. 

Mason. 

Mina. 

Mon-tah. 

Me-mock-a-wah. 

Me-ba-to-uubbee. 

Mab-la-bo-na. 

Me-ab-sbo-nah. 

Mary Ann. 

Me-ab-sbam-tubbee. 

Mea h-sbo-tubbee. 

Mock-ab-to-uab. 

Me-la-bo-nah. 

Mo-me tim-ah. 

Me-ba-tubbe. 

Mok-a-cbubbee. 

Mab-no-te-uiab. 

Me-ab-isb-tam-be. 

Mak-ab-le-bo-nab. 

Matb-la. 

Ma-cbe-tubbe. 

Min-tab-bul)bee. 

Mab-bau-tubbe. 

Me-la. 

Mak-ab-bi-ab. 

Me-ab-sbo-tubbe. 

Me-asb-e-mab. 

Mak-a-le-bo-ke. 

Mo-ruin-tub be (alias Mo- 

ma-cba ) . 
Mab-to-nab. 
Mab-ke. 
Mab-ye (alias Ok-lib-mi- 

ah). 
Mab-be-cubbe. 
Me-be-yo-ka -lubbe. 
Me-ab-sbu-nab. 
Min-te-bubbe. 
Moc-ab-be. 
Mal-Ie-tubbe. 
Me-be-le-bo-nah. 
Mab-ab-tab-bo-nab. 
Me-o-eliubbe. 
Mi-ab-tubbe. 
]\Iuk-ab-bo-tini-ah. 
Me-be-o-tim-ah. 
Mak-e-ubbee. 
]Me-bab-tab-tah. 
Me-be-looth-tubbe. 
Minsjo-boma. See Capt. 

Bob. 
Me-tab. 

Me-asb-fane-ubbe. 
Me-ah-cbe. 
Me-bab-tish-te-ah. 
Min-te-bo-yo. 
Me-ab-sbiu-tubbe (or Me- 

asb-in-tubbe). 
Me-a b-bo-ka-tubbe. 
Me-sbe-uiab-tubbe. 



Mah-le-le-ho-nah. 

Me-chubbe. 

Mi-ab-tim-ab. 

Me-yo-to-nab. 

Mo-nab-tubbe. 

Misb-tab-tubbe. 

Min-to-cubbe. 

Ma lie. 

Min-te-nubbe. 

Mah-bo-nah. 

Me-ah-i-ab-cbu-nah. 

Min-to-ba-nah. 

Min-ta-cbubbe. 

Me-ab-sbo-uab. 

jNIis-e-au-ba-tubbe. 

Ma-hi-ye. 

Mab-ba-cubbe. 

Me-ab-cbubbe. 

Mab-le-le. 

Mi-ab-tubbe. 

Me-bab-kab-tim-ah. 

Man-cbubbe. 

Mo-sbo-le-tubbe. 

Me-sbuu-tab-tubbe. 

Misb-een-ab-to-nah. 

Mab-le-ab. 

Min-te-cbubbe. 

Me-ab-sbe-iuab. 

Me-bab-tim-ab. 

Ma-la -be-yo-cbe (orMath- 

le-bi-o-ja). 
Me-ab-to-co-nah. 
Me-be-ah-cbubbe. 
Mo-min-tubbe (or Billy 

Jackson). 
Mo-miu-che. 
M-ba-che. 
Me-ba-te-kubbe. 
Me-cani-bee. 
Mo-sha-kal. 
Mue-la-le-cbubbe. 
Mingo-bapia (alias Ne-ta- 

cubbe). 
Me-sbam-bee. 
Mi-o-nubbe. 
Mi-yab-bo-nah. 
Mo-sbu-lak-a. 
Mab-to-nab. 
Mam-bab. 
Mo-min-cbe. 
Mul-la-le-bo-nah. 
Me-asb-pal-lah. 
Mab-li. 
Moon-tab. 
Me-ba-tubbe. 
M-sbe-be-kubbe. 
]Me-ba-cbe. 
Musb-a-lab-kah. 
Ma-be-tubbe. 
JIul-a-tubbe. 
Mab-lab. 
Minte-bo-nab. 
Ma-ko-ka. 
Man-tubbe. 
Mo-nini-tubbe. 
Me-tab-lah. 
Mi-yab-tubbe. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



79 



Mah-ka-tubbe. 

Mah-yah. 

Me-hat-e-she. 

Mah-ko-cha. 

Mah-ho-tubbe. 

Muk-am-bee. 

Mulla-tubbe. 

Mi-ya-cubbe. 

Me-ha-che-tiibbe. 

Me-yah-tubbe. 

Ma-ha-te-tubbe. 

Maho-ka. 

Me-ho-te-ah. 

Me-she-ma h-ho-nah. 

Muk-in-tnbbe. ' 

Me-ha-to-iiam-bee. 

Me-haw. 

Me-shom-ti-yah. 

Me-ha-che-to-nah. 

Mnttnl-bee. 

Me-ah-sho-ka. 

Mah-la-ho-ka. 

Me-sliam-le. 

Me-ha-took-ho-nah. 

Mah-le. 

Mab-e-tl-yah. 

Mal-as-ho-nah. 

Ma-slio-la. 

Ma-cliubbe. 

Me-he-niah. 

Me-ah--she-mah. 

Me-sba-tubbe. 

Me-sba-tubbe. 

Me-shone-tab-tubbe. 

Me-ho-te-uiab. 

Moon-tiibbe. 

Me-han-to-tiibbe. 

Me-nb-sho-nah. 

Me-ah-sbo-tiibbee. 

Me-he-o-tubbee. 

Mok-in-lubbee. 

Me-niab-tam-be. 

Me-ab-to-cbubbee. 

Me-sban-be. 

Me-bab-to-nah. 

Me-ab-sbe-nah. 

Mab-la. 

Mns-sbn-le-lah. 

Me-ab-1 ubl)ee. 

Min-te-liibbee. 

Math-Ia-tubbe. 

Me-shniie-tiibbee. 

Mi-hab-tini-ab. 

Mo-nim-toin-ba. 

Me-asb-oon-te-mah. 

Me-ba-la-bo-nah. 

Me-ha-to-nab. 

Mish-oon-tubbe. 

Mah-la-ho-uab. 

Me-asb-in-lnbbe. 

Mok-o-nubl)e. 

Mok-a-tubbe. 

Me-sbe-niab-tubbe. 

Me-bab. 

Me-sboon-tnh-tah. 

Mab-le-bo-ka. 

Me-be-ah-te-mah. 



Me-ab-sbu-nah. 

Me-ab-bo-nah. 

Me-bi-o-tubbee. 

Min-ta-hubbee. 

Moon-ta. 

Moon-tab. 

Me-la. 

Ma-ha-lo-ma-tubbee. 

Mln-ta-bo-ka. 

Ma-ben-to-uab. 

Ma-ba-cba. 

Mab-ho-nab. 

M-ab-sbo-nocka. 

Moon-tubbee. 

Me-o-tubbee. 

Mnb-le-ah-tah. 

Min-te-bubbee. 

Ma-iin-too-nah. 

Mal-la-le-bo-nah. 

Ma lo-la-bo-nah. 

Ma-lnbbee. 

Mis-to-bo-yea. 

Mook-ka-fa. 

Mi-yah. 

Min-tab-cbubbe. 

Miu-te-bo-yo. 

Me-he-tam-be. 

Ma-ha-to-na. 

]Min-ta-bubbe. 

Me-ab-sbia. 

Me-ba-to-na. 

Misb-sbam-be (orMe-ash- 

am-be). 
Me-a-tube. 
Mal-la-bo-ka. 
Muth-toon-bah. 
Mock-ab-bi-yah. 
Mab-la (or Suckey). 
Mah-ban-to-nah. 
Moon-tubbe ( or Moon-tah ) . 
Mab-bi-tnbbe. 
Mint-tubbee. 
Ma-ka-le. 
Muk-a-to-na. 
Mas-sa-bi. 
Me-lin-ga-li-ah. 
Mat-he-cbubbee. 
Mis-ta-i-a-bo-ka. 
Ma-bo-lut-ubbe. 
Ma-lis-sa. 
Mi-ba-ya-tubbe. 
Molly. 
Moon-tab. 
Mary. 

Maa-sheni-a-bo-ka. 
Me-ab-tini-niah. 
Moon-tubbee. 
Mo-bf-ubbe. 
^ris-tiibbe. 
Ma-bam-bee. 
JIo-sb(ini-knbbe. 
Mul-la-le-bo-nab. 
]\re-hab-t<)-nab. 
M-ba-che-bo-nab. 
Ma-ba-tai-oniubbee. 
Me-bi-a-tnbbee. 
Min-tubbee. 



Na-i-o-ka. 

Nancy. 

No-a-te-ma. 

Nat. 

Nancy. 

Ne-take-iu-lubbee. 

No-wa. 

Nok-o-nubbee. 

Nok-any-ta-ya. 

Nln-ta-bo-rua. 

Nock-ubba. 

Nock-ne-mi-yubbee. 

Nol-a-tubbee. 

Nok-ne-a-tubbe. 

Nab-na-e-mab. 

Nah-sa. 

Nock-a-way-cbubbee. 

Nock-a-la-bo-te-mab. 

No-se-bo-nah. 

Ne-bi-ab-to-nah. 

No-ah-bo-tubbee. 

Nock-a-cbe-tubbee. 

Nock-a-na-ho-nnbbee. 

No-la. 

No-ab-to-nnbbee. 

Ne-la. 

Nock-a-na-cbubbee. 

Nock-a-nnbbee. 

Nock - e - a - cbubbee (or 

Cbub-bee). 
Na-chubbe (or Nock ne- 

cbubbee). 
Nokis-tah-ahah. 
Nan-to-wah-yo. 
Nook-a. 

No-ke-mo-nubbe. 
No-wab-bo-ka. 
Nok-e-ne-ti-yah. 
Nock-un-am-be. 
Nock-e-niab-sbubbe. 
Nok-is-ni-ubbe. 
Nok-se-ka-tubbe. 
Nok-isb-to-nah. 
Nok-e-ne-nbbe. 
Nok-ko-ab-bo-mah. 
Ne-tock-oosb-ta h. 
Nok-ish-tab-ok-la-tiibbee. 
Nancy, or lln-an-cbe. 
Nok-ue-bo-tnbbe. 
Na-po-le. 
Ne-le. 

Nok-e-na-tam-be. 
Nok-e-uio-nnbbe. 
Nok-ne-to-lubbe. 
Nok-ab-pe-sab. 
No-la. 
Nook -fa -lab (alias Ah- 

nook-pa-la ) . 
No-wab-bo-cubbe. 
Na-tnbbe. 
Nofk-i-o-tubbe. 
Nok-iii-tainbe. 
Nok-ne-bab-tah-e. 
Nnk-ok-ab-bo-niah. 
No-ab-bo-nab. 
Nok-e-cbiib!)e. 
Nok-ne-ba-tubbe. 



80 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



Nok-ish-ti-yah. 

Nok-i-ue-liih. 

No-wali-te-uiah. 

Xo-tock-ani-be. 

Kok-is-tubba. 

Nok-ish-to-uubbe. 

>s'u-wa-bo-ka. 

Nook-tab-lubbe. 

Kok-ho-niab. 

Nok-na-tbub-be. 

Na-wabbe. 

Ne-tab-cubbe. 

Xe-tiik-o-ka. 

Na-o-ka. 

Nok-we-tab. 

Nok-e-wa-tiibbe. 

Nok-isb-ti-nbbe. 

Nok-ho-tubbe. 

Noon-cbiibbe. 

Ne-tuk-ab-ehe. 

Nok-ne-la. 

Nok-e-ne-tnbbe. 

Kok-a-ne-la. 

Kok-nam-be. 

No-wa-bubbe. 

Nok-a-sbubbe. 

Kok-a-cbubbe. 

Kok-isb-tab-sbah. 

Ne-nok-kium-bee. 

Nulth-la ( or E-la-bo-ti-ah ) . 

Nok-isb-te-iibbe. 

Nok-iieen-tubbee. 

Nok-e-ne-fe-nah. 

Ne-tuk-ah-cbick-e-ma. 

No-wah-taui-be. 

Nuk-sho-pubbe. 

Nok-ne-ti-yah. 

Ne-asb-e-nubbe. 

Nok-isb-tani-be. 

Nok-a-man-cbe-ka-bee. 

Nab-bo-lo-mnstubbe. 

Nok-isb-tubbee. 

Nook-wa-tubbe. 

Na-bo-sa. 

]S'ok-me-ba t-tubbe. 

Nok-bo-ma-bajo. 

Nok-ish-to-uab. 

Nok-ne-o-ka-tubbee. 

Nok-niu-cbe. 

Nok-ni-ta-bubbe. 

Kok-wan-be. 

No-wah. 

Nok-o-un-cba-hubbe. 

Nok-cbu-nubbe. 

No-wah-bo-nab. 

Mok-ue-tubbe. 

No-la. 

Nab-sbo-lab-bonab. 

No-sa-kab. 

Nush-ko-bo-to-ko-lo. 

Nock-e-ne-tubbe. 

Ts'o-wab. 

Nock-e-na-lab-nubbee. 

Nock-ne-a-cbe. 

TS'ok-isb-ti-yab. 

Ne-tah-cbe-to. 

Nock-fil-e-hi-yab. 



Nuk-she-pa-ubbe. 

Ne-tak-e-ruah. 

No-sa-kab. 

Nok-ne-eeu-tubbe. 

Nu-wa-toiu-bee. 

No-.sa-kab. 

No-ab-tubbe. 

No-ab-bubbe. 

Nab-miii-ab-bo-ka. 

No-b-ue-mau-to-iiab. 

Nock-a-ne-lab. 

Nab-bo-te-inab. 

Nock-lsb-to-niibbee. 

Nan-uo-ba-bo-nab. 

No-le-baui-be. 

Nok-ue-tnbbe. 

Noke-e-ne-ene-bubbe. 

No-ko-sbe. 

Nok-is-tom-be. 

Ne-tuk-e lubbe. 

No-a-bam-ba. 

No-kan-yo-ka-tu-na. 

Na-ne-nia. 

Nau-cha. 

No-cum-mab-ho-ka. 

No-ka-tab. 

No-wa-yab. 

No-wab-ta-kah. 

Nock-bo-mab-bah-cho. 

No-wa-bo-nab. 

Nan-ne-nbbe. 

No-sa-cubbe. 

No-quo-ab-tubbe. 

Nock-a-cbook-ma. 

Nock-pe-la-sa. 

No-e-eui-yea. 

Nok-a-ba-la-jee. 

No-la. 

No-a-ho-na. 

Nok-e-fil-la-ho-na, 

No-la-bo-na. 

Nok-pa-la. 

No-wab-be-mah. 

No-sbo-bab. 

Nook-cbin-tubbe. 

Na-wa-bo-ka. 

Nok-ne-o-ka-tubbee. 

Nok-an-e-tubbee. 

Nim-nok-ba-cubbe. 

No-wab-bo-ka. 

Nok-isb-te-iuab-yubbe. 

Nook-fille or Fil-Ie. 

Ona-tubbe. 

Oak-la -te-a. 

Oon-ta-cbe-a. 

Oon-te-a-tubbe. 

Ona-cbee. 

Ona-bo-ka. 

Ok-pe-a-bubbee. 

Ok-le-nie-i-a. 

Osle-as-te-ma. 

Oke-eba-te-nia. 

Ona-tubbee. 

On-wa-ka. 

Oua-te-na. 

Ou-a-to-bo-yo. 



Og-lam-is-tubbee. 
O-na-bo-ka. 
0-on-ta-cba. 
0-nok-fil-la-tubbee (alias 

FlHatubbee). 
O-sla-bubbee. 
Oke-nie-i-a. 
Ok-a-isb-ba-la-la. 
0-gle-a-te-nia. 
Ooou-ka-bubbee. 
O-glab-bo-uubbee. 
Ooon-tiiii-to-ka. 
O-iiab-be-cbubbee. 
Oon-Dab;touj-tubbee. 
Ogle-bo-lab. 
O-glab-nou-nab. 
O-na-cbiibbee. 
Oo-nab-tubbee. 
Oke-la-we-tubbee (orOhe- 

lin-tubbee). 
O-tim-po-iiubbee. 
O-nab-te-ab. 
0-nab-tiibbee. 
Oon-uab-bo-ka. 
Oon-a-taui-bee. 
Ogle-nii-o-nab. 
0-glab-no-wa b-cba . 
O-nab-bubbee. 
Oon-ua-bo-kee. 
O-niibbee. 
Oon-nab. 
Ow-wab-te-ab. 
O gla-bam-bee. 
Oon-ta-bo-yo. 
0-quun-tab. 
Ooii-ta-iuab-cbubbee. 
0-gla-ubbee. 
Ow-we-cbab. 
O-lubbee-to-nah. 
Oppa-sab-be-niah. 
0-gla-bo-te-nab. 
Oou-tab-zubbee. 
0-tbulck-a-bo-yo. 
Oon-ta-kab. 
Ok-lisb-ti-ab. 
Oas-te-nubbe. 
Oon-ab-tubbee. 
Ok-cbubbee. 
Ona-bin-lubbe. 
O-iuol-le-tubbe. 
Oon-cba-la. 
Ooii-ab-cbubbe. 
Oou-ba-tubbe. 
Ok-la-bo-tnbbee. 
Ok-cbe-tim-ab. 
Ok-Iab-o-ruab. 
Oon-te-ab-tubbee. 
Ok-la-me-asb-ab. 
Oon-ab-be-tubbe. 
Ok-lab-tubbe. 
Otb-la-bo-nah. 
Ooii-ab-cbubbe. 
Oon-an-cbe-ab-tiibbe. 
Ok-cba (or Ela-ok-chub- 

be). 
Oc-cbock-ab-tubbe. 
Ok-in-to-la-bo-nah. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



81 



Oon-ta-tubbe. 

Ok-lah-ho-tubbe. 

Oou-ubbe. 

Ok-ah-iu-cliuk-mah. 

Ok-isb-te-mah. 

Ok-lab-ba-mah. 

Ok-ab-cbe-ah. 

Ok-lee-bau-tubbe. 

Oon-te-ka-ah. 

Onab-te-mab. 

Ok-lab-le. 

Ok-isb-tab-na. 

Ok-ab-fa-ma-bu-nab. 

0-na-te-ab. 

Ok-Lib-oka. 

Ok-le-iiii-ubbe. 

Ok-lab-cbiibbe. 

Ok-bah-cbe-tab. 

Ok-i-yo-iiie-bo-uab. 

Oou-ab-bubbe. 

0-n<ib-bnbbe. 

Ok-lab-tim-ab. 

Ok-po-cbes-be-niab. 

0-ma-tubbe. 

Oon-ab-be-mah. 

Ok-la-o-nab. 

On-wak-nbbe. 

Oon-ab-book-ta. 

Oon-wab-tubbe. 

Ok-isb-ta-mab-bo-iuab. 

Ok-le-an-ue. 

Ok-lam-ba. 

Okisb-ti-yah (or Isb-ti- 

ab). 
Okis-tah-cbock-ma-baka. 
Ok-a-bubbe. 
Ok-a-bi-an-cba-hnbbe. 
Ok-cba-tubbe. 
Ok-li-yab. 
Ok-ti-e-cbe-mab. 
On-te-uia-bo-zo. 
Ok-le-mi-yab. 
Okab-no-wab. 
Ooii-te-niab. 
On-ti-o-mab. 
Oon-te-ab-tubbe. 
Ok-lu-bnbbe. 
Ok-ab-cbe-ab-bonah. 
Ok-ba-to-nab. 
0-kis-ti-yab. 
Ok-hi-cbe-bo-ka. 
Ok-a-to-bi-be-nab. 
Oou-ubbe. 
Ope-ab-kubbe. 
Ok-hi-bo-nab. 
Okab-ta-lio-nab. 
Okis-tab-hi-bo-nah. 
Ok-cbe-ba-to-uab. 
0-cbee. 

Oneni-cbebubbe. 
Ok-le-niuttab. 
Ok-lab-yab-bo-nah. 
Ok-le-uiab-cbe-ab-bo-nab. 
0-na-cbe-bubbe, 
On-tl-o-uiab. 
O-na-ba-tubbe. 



Ok la-bee. 

O-fa-bo-mab. 

Ona-bo-kab. 

O-na-he-ruab. 

Oba-mibbe. 

On-tab-e-uiab. 

0-nab-cbe-tiru-ab. 

On-te-i-tubbe. 

On-te-kab. 

Ota-kubbe. 

0-te-ab-tubbe. 

Oke-la-be-mab. 

Ok-la-no-wab. 

Ok-lab-be-yubbee. 

Oon-ti-e-iuab. 

Ok-lak-in-tiibbe. 

Ok-luu-gee-bubbe. 

Ono-che-bubbe. 

Ok-li-bo-ka. 

Ocbee. 

Obe-nab. 

Ok-cba-tubbe. 

Ocbee. 

0-nab-cbe-bo-yo. 

Osb-ta-bab-ba. 

Ok-la-bubbee. 

O-tbab. 

O-nab-tab. 

Oatb-la-cbe. 

0-ka-lsb-te-e-iuab. 

O-nab-be-iuab. 

Ok-la-bo-uubbe ( alias Muk 

o-nubbe). 
Ok-cba-tubbe. 
Ok-bab-sbe-bo-uab. 
Oon-ubbe. 
Ok-lab-be-niab. 
O-nab-tubbe. 
Ok-li-ab. 
Oka-isb-te-iuab. 
Oon-ab-bo-cbubbee. 
0-ka-iu-cbuck-uab. 
Oou-au-cba-bubbee. 
Oon-ab-be-mab. 
Ona-book-ta. 
Onaii-cbe-bubbe. 
Ok-cba-tubbe. 
Ok-bi-bubbe. 
Ok-le-uio-mab. 
Ok-lo-bab. 
Ok-a-yo-mab. 
Oo-uaw-mab-e-tubbe. 
0-man-too-uab. 
Ouu-tam-be. 
Ouu-ab-ban-tubbee. 
Oun-ah-bo-yo. 
On-ta-cubbee. 
Ok-hi-kiu-ab. 
Oon-ab-book-tab. 
Ok-cba-tu-uab. 
Oon-te-ab-tubbe. 
Oon-ab-bo-nab. 
0-kisb-ti-nie. 
Ok-ab-.sta-uiab. 
Ok-b\b-cbe-bo-yo. 
Ok-is-tan-tab. 



Oo-tub-ba. 

O-ne-ml-yab. 

Oo-bab-tubbe. 

Owa-tubbe. 

0-nab-cbubbee. 

Oon-tab-bab-yo-tubbee. 

Og-li-mi-a. 

Oun-nubbee. 

O-nab-cba-tubbee. 

O-kab-cbe-ah. 

Oon - take - ubbee (alias 
Take-ubbe). 

O-Iab-tin-tubbee. 

0-gIe-o-nab. 

Ok-is-te-mo-nab. 

Ok-la-bo-nab. 

Ok-isb-tal-o-bab-bo-ka. 

Onab-cbe-bam-be. 

Outb-la-bubbe. 

On-to-bab-nab. 

Oke-lisb-ti-yah. 

Oon-a-bam-bee. 

Oon-bik-ab. 

Ok-lau-boo-nab. 

0-ta-sbe-mak. 

Ok-labba (or Tap-pe-na- 
bo-ma ) . 

0-na-bo-ka. 

0-na-bam-bee. 

0-na-be-ma. 

Ok-la-ba-la. 

0-nab-tick-ab. 

O-nab-ba-niab. 

Oon-sbu-ab-bo-ka. 

0-uubbee. 

0-lab-babu-cba. 

0-kab-bo-te-mab. 

0-nab. 

0-glock-ka-yo. 

0-glab-mab-ka. 

Oou-nock-a-inab, 

Oou-tock-ab-ne-ubbe. 

Oak-is-ta-cba. 

O-nook-cba (or Ouook- 
cbubbe). 

Ok-i-a-cba ( alias Tab-nap- 
pe-bo- ja). 

O-mabu-sba. 

Ow-wa-cba-bo-uab. 

0-gle-a-tubbee. 

Ok-a-ba-cbubbee. 

Oon-tan-tubbee 

Otb-la. 

O-gla-o-ba-tubbe. 

O-gla-ba-ma. 

0-lut-le-to-ua. 

O-pe-ab-tubbe. 

Ok-la-bo-tubbee. 

0-ka-lan-cbe-bubbee. 

Ob-la-hib. 

Ok-is-tab-lo-la. 

Ok-la-biui-ab. 

Ok-la-be-lubbe. 

Ok-cbil-e-be-ka. 

Otb-la-cbubbe. 

On-ab-ta-kah. 



88855—15- 



-6 



82 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



Og-lah-bam-lee, 

Ona-tubbe. 

Ok-U-yok-ubbe. 

Oli-o-ka. 

Ok-lah-bo-nah. 

Ohul-iii-tiibbe. 

Ok-Io-bah. 

Ok a-la-che (or Ish-to- 

pab-uubbe). 
Ok-lab-o-nah. 
O-ue-bo-te-ina. 
Ok-ish-tal-hi-wah-ho-nah. 
Ob-to-gab-lan-tubbe. 
O-gli-o. 
Oon-ah-tubbe (or Un-chu- 

tubbee). 
0-na-tubbee. 
0-gIe-asb-ubbe. 
Ok-la-ka-tiibbee. 
Ooclury, Pallas. 
Ooclury, George. 
Ooclury, Cyrus. 
O-glisb-ti-yah. 
Ooii-te-mah. 
Ok-ain-to-la. 

Pan-a-eha. 

Po-sbo-a-tubbe. 

Pis-ubbe. 

Phillis. 

Pis-ba-lo-ti-ma. 

Pis-am-ok-an-tubbee. 

Pis-ak-a-cbook-e-ma. 

Pis-a-tubbe. 

Pis-ab-o-te-ma. 

Pa-la m-a-ho-ka. 

Pa-sbutb-lo-ke. 

Fa-le-sa-bo-ka. 

Pausb-o-uubbee. 

Poiu-ttllab. 

Pis-ab-ke-a-tubbee. 

Fab-nab. 

Palla-macbubbee. 

Pah-bab-cbo. 

Pis-Siib-boke-ta. 

Pbil-lo-ti-ab. 

Pick-but-tnb. 

Pal-la. 

Pusley. 

Pusk-co-cbubbee. 

Pbil-le kab-ja. 

Pis-sali-ba-mab. 

Po-sha-to-mibbee. 

Pejr^'y. 

Pal la. 

Pbil-le-iiiab. 

Peter. 

Pal-wah-cbubbee. 

Pis-tick e-ab. 

Pab-lam-mab. 

Pis-subboe. 

Po-tab. 

Po-iuibboe. 

Pab-sbo-nah. 

Pisb-tan-ta-tubbee. 

Pab-sba-bo-te-mah. 

Pickens, Ilacbel. 



Pe-lubba. 

Pa-tubbe. 

Pe-lubbe. 

Pis-ab-to-ke-Diab. 

Pis-ab-bo-ka-tubbe. 

Pis-ab-le-bo-ka. 

Pis-ab-bo-ka-tubba. 

Pab-nab. 

Pis-ab-tik-cubbe. 

Pis-ab-le-bo-ka. 

Pis-ab-bo-ka-tubba. 

Pab-nab. 

Pis-ab-tik-cubbe. 

Pok-o-cbubbe. 

Pe-sa-cbe-bo-nah. 

Pis-ab-tim-lab. 

Pis-ah-bom-be. 

Pa-sa-cbubbe. 

Pis-a-ho-kab-tim-ah. 

Pis-tek-e-ubbe. 

Po-tubbe. 

Pock-oiu-e-cbubbe. 

Pock-ab-ma. 

Pe-le-bani-be. 

Pel-le-sab-bo-nab. 

Pis-ab-cbe-tubbe. 

Pe-ab-bubbe. 

Pitb-le-le. 

Po-te-le-cbubbe. 

Pis-te-a.b-tubbe. 

Pun-ab. 

Pis-ab-tu-nab. 

Pbe-lin-tab. 

Pis-ab-tim-ab. 

Pauiicb-tunab. 

Pis-ab-cbaii-tubbe. 

Pis-ab-bo-chubbe. 

Po-nok-to-Cbubbe. 

Po-sbon-sbe-bubbe. 

Pul-ke-tubbe. 

Pis-ab-tam-be. 

Pis-ab-tisb-ubbe. 

Pbe-la-cba-bo-ka. 

Pis-ab-tim-o-nab. 

Pis-ab-cbim-ah. 

Pa-la-cbubbe. 

Pab-lubbe. 

Pe-tam-o-tubbe. 

Pis-ab-bo-tu-na. 

Pis-ab-bo-ka-tim-ah. 

Pis-is-tubbe. 

Pab-lab. 

Po-lab. 

Pis-subbe. 

Pis-ab-cba-bo-nah. 

Pis-took-chubbe. 

Pab-sab-cbe-iuab. 

Pabyab. 

Pul-ka-tubbe. 

Pis-ab-bo-kab-tim-ah. 

Pis-ab-niok-in-tubbe. 

Pis-ab-bo-tim-ab. 

Pe-be-le-tubbe. 

Pab-sab-bo-nah. 

Pou-tbese-tubbe. 

Pa-la-sa-bo-mah. 

Pis-ab-cbe-bo-yo. 



Pasb-ab-ho-ruab. 
I'a-sba-bo-nah. 
Pis-ab-bo-nab. 
Pis-ab-tubbe (alias Ah- 

pa-sa-tam-be). 
Pbil-e-mo-yab. 
Pis-a-bam-bee. 
Pa-sab-te-mab. 
Pe-yab-bo-ka. 
Pis-ab-man-tubbe. 
Pasb-ah-bo-yo. 
Puk-an-bo-ka. 
Pi-yab-booc-ta. 
Phil-e-ab-bo-yo. 
Pbil-e-mon-te-kah. 
Pis-ab-cba-bubbe. 
Pis-sab-te-mab. 
Pul-le-ho-nab. 
Po-la-tubbe. 
Pis-sa-cbe-bo-yo. 
Pis-sa-bo-ka. 
Po-ka. 

Pab-lab-bubbe. 
Pab-ta-tubbe. 
Pis-sab-bo-nubbe. 
Pis-sa-bani-bee. 
Pis-sab-e-kab. 
Pis-sab-bo-nab. 
Pis-to-puu-ue. 
Pis-sab-te-kab. 
Po-tab. 

Pis-e-ho-teniab. 
Pis-sab-lab-be-nsa h. 
Pun-ubbe. 
Pausb-ok-cbi-ah. 
Pis-ab-to-nab. 
Po-ta-mab. 
Poush-is-nab-ho-mah. 
Pis-ah-on-te-uiab. 
Pis-took-cba. 
Pa-nubbe. 
Pis-ab-to-sbe-mab. 
Pausb-ok-cbea. 
Poo-tab. 

Pousb-is to-nubbe. 
Pis-sah-cbe-te-mah. 
Pousb-is-te-nubbe. 
Pa-sa-tubbe. 
Pe-ba-tubbe. 
Po-tab. 

Pbil-e uia-bubbe. 
Pbil-e-uioon-tubbe. 
Pil-e-bo-nubbe. 
Pa-sa-tom-ba. 
Posb-e-mab. 
Pis-a-cba-tubbe. 
Posb-a n-o-wabbee. 
Pas-cum-me. 
Pausb-ik-isb-o. 
Pul-ka. 

Pis-sab-ka-to-nah. 
Pis-ab-ta-cubbe. 
Pis-te-ab. 
Pasb-i-o-nah. 
Pbil-e-nioon-tubbe. 
Pasb-isb-te-ubbe. 
Pis-i-to-kubbee. 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



83 



Pis-took-cbab. 

Po-sis-ti-yab. 

Pis-sab-te-mah. 

Piil-lab. 

Pis-sa b-mock-an-tubbe. 

Po-sbab-tubbee. 

Pa-sab-bo-nab. 

Peg-ga. 

Po-tbo-tab. 

Pa-sam-bee. 

Pbil-le-ab. 

Pus sab-kab. 

Pis-sah-koke-ab-ta-mab. 

Pis-ab-kab. 

Po-sbiit-tab. 

Pis-a Ill-be. 

Pe-le-cbubhe. 

Pis-ab-tiui-ab. 

Posb-a-ma-ta-ka. 

Pis-ab-ti-ab. 

Pis-ab-o-gla. 

Po-tubbe. 

Pa-sab-bo-nah. 

Po-nab. 

Pis-ab-ish-no-wah. 

Pis-ah-bo-min-ah. 

Pes-ta-ge. 

Pah-na. 

Pe-no-la-Perry. 

Pis-a-tubbee. 

Po-to-tubbe. 

Pe-ab-sbubbee. 

Pis-sab-bab-tubbe. 

Pab-sbo-nab. 

Pis-sab-nab-to-nah. 

Po-sbab-loke-ta (or Po- 

sbock-ta). 
Pockin-ain-bee. 
Pis-biibbee. 
Pasb-bo-mab. 
Pocka-na-yab. 
Pe-tab. 

Pis-sab-tubbee. 
Pan-sblsk-tu-na. 
Pi-al-e-bo-ka. 
Pis-a-to-nubbee. 
Pa-shub-ba-tubbee. 
I'o-cbam-ba. 
Pa-sa-cbnbbee. 
Pis-a -be-tiibbee. 
Posb-a-nuis-tubbee. 
Pi-sa-te-a. 
Pis-aho-ka-tubbee. 
Peter. - 

Puek-cbuubbee. 
Putb-kin-tubbee. 
Pan-sbe-o-ha. 
Pa-siibboe. 
Pab-ba-mab. 
Pepl-ab-tubl)ec. 
Pis-ab-to-ciibbee. 
Po-tubbee. 
Pis-tab-bo-nab. 
Pis-ali-bo-nab. 
Pis-ab-bo-ka-to-uab. 
Pok-ab-la-bo-nab. 
Pis-ab-te-mab. 



Po-sbe-niah. 
Pa-sba-bo-to-na. 
Pis-ab-jab. 
Poo-ab-loop-ka. 
Pis-at-i-ah. 
Pi s-ab-cbe-bo-nab. 
Pone-lab. 
Pis-took-ebah. 
Pousb-isb-to-nah. 
Pis-ab-sbe-te-mab. 
Pa-sab-bo-nab. 
Pis-ab-ban-bee. 
Pis-sab-bo-to-mah. 
Pis-sab-bam-be. 
Po-to-tubbe. 
Pis-a t-am-te-mah. 
Pbil-e-nien-tu-nab. 
Pi s-sab-che-bubbee. 
Pil-ab-tubbe. 
Poon-tab. 
Peas-tubbe. 
Pis-ab-ba-lubbe. 
Pa-cbubbe (or La -pa-chub- 
bee). 
Pis-ab-tubbee. 
Po-sbe-mah. 
Pen-mis-sali. 
Polly. 

Quah-na. 
Quisb-tut-tab. 

Row-le. 
Raybarn. 

Sab-o-yo. 
Syla. 
Sniitb. 
Sbi-mi-ah. 
Sukey. 
Sopby. 
Sampson. 
Susa. 
Shok-ta. 
Socka. 

Span-a-mln-go. 
Steia. 

Stay niatubbee. 
Stan-ti-uia. 
Si-e-na. 
Syop-a-tubbee. 
Sbuk-a-tnbbee. 
Sta-ta-he-ma. 
Ste-a-ho-te-ma. 
So-kin-nab. 

Stani-niab-ban-to-mab. 
Sbock-ko-yea. 
Sbin-e-ab. 
Sina. 

Stim-ab-ha-tubbee. 
Stab-tubbee. 
Silis. 

Stn-ab-nubbee. 
Stil-la-ebubbee. 
Slia-ho-ka. 

Sbo-na-bo-ke-ta- (or Cusb- 
ho-nah). 



Sam. 

Sarab. 

Sbo-mi-yab. 

Suckey. 

Sully-bo-j'o. 

Sto-nab-cbubbee. 

Sutte. 

Stab-na. 

Sbum-to-nab. 

Sab-ho-nab. 

Sbab-lah-tab. 

Sofa. 

Sho-mo-labka. 

Sab-la. 

Sba-mab-ho-yo. 

Sill-la-bo-nab. 

Sak-e-tim-ab. 

Sbe-mab-la-to-nah. 

Sba-ka-pa -bo-nab. 

Sbo-tubbe. 

Sal-la. 

Suck-a. 

Sbam-pa-no-ka. 

Sam-me. 

Sbo-nab. 

Sab-un-me-bo-ka. 

Sbo-tim-ah. 

She-ko-pab-bo-mab. 

Sah-tubbe (or Pisah-tub- 

be). 
Sbe-ne-po-tubbe. 
Sbo-te-mab. 
Sbum-pa-la (orCbumk-ul- 

a-ka ) . 
Shan-io-tubbe. 
Sbam-pi-e. 
Stab-nubbe. 
Sbo-nab. 
Sile. 

Sba-ne-kia. 
She-se. 

Sbam-ta-bo-ka. 
Sbo-moon-tah. 
Sbo-mab-la-tubbe. 
Ste-mok-ka-yo. 
Sbe-mab-bo-yo. 
Sba-ka-ho-mab. 
Sbo iiiab. 
Stab-bo-nab. 
Sbon-wa-no. 
Suk-a-tubbe. 
Shu-wak-ki-yab. 
Sbe-mi-yab. 
Stoo-nok-a. 
Ste-ma-lab. 
Stu-na. 
Sal-lie. 
Stea-le. 
Sbe-ma. 
Sbo-tubbe. 
So-kutebi. 
Sbe-co-pam-be. 
Sbi-ab-kah. 
Sal-le-ok-ka. 
Sok-ka-tl-ab. 
Sbab-nl-o-tubbe. 
Sally. 



84 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



Sal-He. 

Sho-ma-ho-ka. 

Sham-bee. 

Sak-ka-tubbe. 

Sho-tubbee. 

Sum-e-hah-chubbe. 

She-co-pan-she-hubbe. 

Sha-nook-a. 

So-ma-ka. 

Sock-ki-a. 

Si-a-na. 

Sah-chah-ho-nah. 

Sal-la. 

She-me-ho-ka. 

She-co-pah-ho-mah. 

Shim-to-nah. 

Sa-ho-yo. 

Shi-ka-.io-na-wa. 

Ste-ma-ho-yo, 

Solomon. 

Shah-pa-ja. 

Shi-yah. 

Sham-pi-o-nah. 

Sal-la. 

Smith. 

Shah-pah-ho-niah. 

Shah-mah. 

Sah-mi-o-ka. 

Sho-nak. 

Se-a-no-la. 

Sta-fa-na. 

Ste-a-tubbee. 

Si-e-la. 

Sta-liibbe. 

Sally. 

Sho-wa. 

Ste-ma -ho-yo-ho-na. 

Stan-cha (alias Ste-ma-ya, 

alias Kon-che). 
Sham-pi-a. 
Sti-ma-la. 
Sa-ba-la. 
Sinah. 
Si-na. 
Shah-nah. 
Sham-tah-o-ka. 
Sah-ho-ba. 
Ste-ah-lio-ka. 
Sho-tubbee. 
Si-ia. 

Tan-a-bon-iibbe. 
Tan-e-clia. 
Tan-a-chee. 
Tho-po-nubbe. 
Tom-pe-i-a. 
Tem-mepa-poua. 
Tik-connbbee. 
Tis-ho-chi-le-ta. 
Tahubbee. 
To-ta-lio-j^o. 
Ta-ho-na. 
Te-i-ya. 
Tik-pa-tubbee. 
Tus-ciibbee ha. 
Tus-ka-em-itta. 



Tarn - a - ho - ta - na (alias 
Stam-a-ho-to-na ) . 

Tik-lo-nubbee. 

Tls-pa-ham-ba (alias TIs- 
ho-ham-ba). 

Tik-beia. 

Tem-a-ka. 

Tam-a-ho-na. 

Tal-a-ho-na. 

Tam-a-tubbee. 

Tuk-a-la-ma-ho-ua. 

To-ta-ho-ma. 

Tillo-watubbe. 

To-lin-cha. 

To-a h-e-min-tubbee. 

Ti-yah. 

Tish-o-ham-bee. 

Thock - - fa - tubbee ( or 
Thock-o-tubee). 

To-che-ah. 

Tah-hock-a-nia-tubbee. 

To-mah-la-ehah. 

Ta-cubbee. 

To-ma. 

Ta-hu-te-mah. 

To-ko-tah. 

Tish-o-pam-bee. 

Tal-wah-ha iii-bee. 

Tus-ki-ah-leek-ah. 

Tick-a-lin-tnbbee. 

Tick-but-tab. 

Tith-la-ho-nab. 

Tim-am-ho-tubbee. 

Tennepee. 

Thompson. 

To-no-wah. 

To-nah. 

Ti-ee-nah. 

Tah-ho-yo. 

To-eha. 

Took -a h-1 a -to-nah. 

Ta-cubbee. 

Tock-ki-ah-chah-ho-nah. 

Tah-ho-nah. 

T;i-mah. 

Te-m i-yah-tubbee. 

To-niah-ho-yo. 

Tini-niin-ta-hubbee. 

Tah-bo-ka. 

Tnsh-a-min-tubbee. 

Tah-ho-la -tubbee. 

To-ki-ab-Carnes. 

Ti sh-a h-ho-n ubbee. 

Tick-la ni-bee. 

Tnk-bo-ka. 

To-pah. 

To-ma h-ho-imbbee. 

To-no-te-niah. 

Ta-ba-eha. 

Tille-mah. 

Tah-no-wah. 

To-me-hattah. 

Tick-be- too-lah. 

To-tubbe. 

Took-la-he-mah. 

Tith-ho-tubbee. 



To-ma. 

Ton-ubbee. 

Tah-pe-chubbe. 

Tosho-ah-ho-nah. 

Tak-a-lam-be. 

Tha-o-hubbee. 

Thlo-po-tubbe. 

Tah-ish-cani-be. 

Te-aske-ho-mah. 

Tim-ah-ha-tubbe. 

Tin-lah. 

Tam-bee (alias Pia-tam- 

bee). 
Tah-ho-nah. 
To-ni-ya. 
Tub-be-ce. 
Tack-ah-lam-be. 
Te-lan-ah-che. 
Tah-ho-va h-ho-nah . 
Tick-ba-ho-nah. 
Tush-ho-nah-tah. 
Tah-he-kah. 
Te-me-ak-ke. 
Ta-to-bah. 
To-no-ho-ka. 
Tik-e-tim-ah. 
Tah-hah-ba. 
Tah-bo-kah. 
To-sho-yo-bo-na h . 
Tan-ne-too-nah. 
To-hubbe. 
Tan-tubbe. 
To-cbubbe. 
Tith-le-le. 
Too-lah-tubbe. 
Ta-cubbe. 
To-ho-nah-te-mah. 
Te-ho-bah-tubbee. 
Tith-li-ah-ho-nah. 
Tah-lo-wah. 
To-nah. 
Tah-pe-nah. 
Tim-o-nah. 
Tith-lo-o-mte-ah. 
Tim-nia-la-ha-cha. 
Tah-pah-lah. 
Te-he-kah. 
Te-ah-ho-nah. 
Tith-le-le-ho-ka. 
Tish-o-pi-ah. 
Te-mah-lah-chee. 
Tah-nah-bo-nah. 
Te-mah-lah. 
Thlo-pulla. 
Tish-o-no-wah-tubbe. 
Tik-ba-ho-tubbe. 
Ta-nam-po-tubbe. 
Tone-ubbe. 
Tak-al-ah-tim-ah. 
Ta-shu-tubbe. 
Tik-ba-ho-tubbe. 
Tah-ho-ye. 
Tusko-lotto. 
To-nah. 
Tack-cubbe. 
Te-mi-ah-ho-yo. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



85 



Tan-pe-na-hubbe. 

To-la-ho-nah. 

To-ba. 

Tish-u-no-wa-tubbe. 

Tom-e-hi-yo. 

Tiin-ah-no-la. 

Tik-bah-ho-nah. 

Tan-oou-i-o-cubbe. 

Took-a-cbubbe. 

Tick-e-b.ih. 

Tick-lah-oo-nah. 

Tan-up-pi-yah. 

Tah-ho-uah. 

Tah-Hubbe. 

Took-a-loon-tubbe. 

To-te-miis-tubbe. 

Tik-li-yah. 

Tal-lo-wab-ho-nah. 

Took-la-ho-na. 

To-bab-t:mi-ya. 

Tah-neeu-cha. 

Tok-ka-la-too-nah. 

Tah-ho-nab. 

Te-mah-be-mah. 

Tah-ka-la-to-nab. 

Tab-bubbe. 

Tal-wah. 

Ta-hubbe. 

To-ah. 

To-ni-a. 

Te-bab-noo-kaboe. 

Tab-nin-to-nab. 
Tlk-e-bib. 

Tah-ho-nab. 

Tah-nap-ha-cubbe. 

Te-mab-taiu-be. 

Tah-ne-ho-iiah. 

Tus-ka-a-to-kah. 

Take-ho-yo. 

Tah-hubbe. 

To-bul lii. 

To-te-pi-ya. 

Tab-no- wab. 

Tab-we-wnh-ho-nah. 

Tik-lo-nubbe. 

To-noon-cba. 

Te-nie-ab-ho-nah. 

To-pe-hih. 

Toon-lah-ho-uah. 

Tah-mah-hoke-chiah. 

Tan-ke-yo. 

Tah-niah-ba-lubbe. 

To-te-ho-yo. 

Tah-e-min-tubbe. 

Tah-inah-le-lubbe. 

Te-lubba. 

Tel lis. 

Tik-bonp-te-mah. 

Tik-bah-bo-mnh. 

To-nie-hnl)be. 

Tib-bali-nbbe. 

Took-la-lio-ua. 

Te-nio-nnh. 

Tish-ok-chia. 

Tok-o-la-tubbe. 

Tash-pa-ho-ka. 



Te-mah. 

To-kal-la-tubbe. 

To-lah-tubbe. 

To-kah-ho-nah. 

Te-ho-yo. 

Tike-be-ubbe. 

Tim-e-tubbe. 

Te-mi-yea. 

To-pa-ho-mah. 

Ti-yea. 

Te-nah. 

Tal-o-wah-ho-nah. 

Tal-ne-ho-yo. 

Te-mah. 

Toon-la-ho-nah. 

To-ho-lah. 

Tah-bo-nah. 

Te-mah. 

To-lah-hubbe. 

Ta-she-co. 

Te-ok-ho-mah. 

To-hee-le. 

Tah-the-ho-nah. 

Tash-pah-tnbbe. 

Te-meen-tah-bo-nah. 

Tebbe-ho-mah. 

Tu s-co-chi-a m-be. 

To-kah. 

Too-nah. 

Tin-to-tubbe. 

Tik-lah-tubbe. 

Tam-nio. 

Te-mam-ba. 

Ta-bo-kah. 

Ta-ho-nah. 

Te-ho-yo. 

Tush-pa b-tubbe. 

Tah-nubbe. 

Tibbe-ho-nah. 

Tith-i-o-tubbe. 

To-lah-ho-nah. 

To-ue. 

Took-ah-lam-be. 

To-wah-noo-hah. 

Ta-wa mp-ha-cubbe. 

To-sho-yo-tubbe. 

Tam-e-tubbee. 

Ti m-a h-no-la-ho-nah. 

Te-ah-ho-yo. 

Tath-le-yo. 

Take-un-i-ye. 

Tan-u-wa-ho-nah. 

Ti-o-nah. 

Tus-ka-ha-kah. 

Te-lo-way. 

Te-the-ubbe. 

Tush-kam-ba. 

Tah-pe-nam-be. 

Tish-o-nuis-tubbe. 

Ta-nam-pis-te-ubbe. 

Te-lah-bo-nah. 

Thla-ko-fa-che. 

To-tam-bee. 

Tush-pa-o-ka. 

Ti-ani-ba. 

Tnh-no-le. 



Tah-ho-ye. 

Tan-uth-la-che. 

Ta-nam-pa-ha-ka. 

Tith-lah-ho-nah. 

Tonk-le. 

Tal-wah-ho-nah. 

To-pah-ho-nah. 

Te-ho-mus-tubbee. 

Tan-o-wa-tubbe. 

Tik-lo-nubbee. 

Tah-fa-mah. 

To-nam-pi sh-ubbe. 

Tah-nin-tubbe. 

To-nubbee. 

Te-cumseh. 

Taylor, Peggy. 

To-nah. 

Ti-ock-he-im-lubbee. 

To-ke-o-to-nah. 

Taylor, Pireua. 

Taylor, Hester A. 

Taylor, David F. 

Tal-wah-to-nah. 

Te-mah-lah. 

Te-a-he (or Is-te-an). 

Ta-ka. 

Tick-bone-tah-yubbe (or 

hubbe). 
Tik-ah-lut-tah. 
To-tubbe. 
Te-me-ho-ka. 
Ta-pe-ne-hubbe. 
Tish-o-tubbe. 
Tus-kam-bee. 
Ta-nam-pa-cha. 
Te-ah-ho-yo. 
Tah-hubbe. 
Tah-me-ue-lubbe. 
Te-nia-yo-la. 
Tap-pe-na-ho-ma. 
Thomas. 
Tan-ti-ma. 
To-kubbee. 
Tuk-a-lubbee. 
Tock-o-la-tubbfe. 
Tus-ka-chuck-ah-mah. 
Tah-la-ho-Uibbe. 
Tush-cubbe ( orTus-cuppa ) 
Tah-na-hln-po. 
To-nubbe. 
Tus-ka-ho-ma. 
To-hah. 

Ta-hol-ba-tubbe. 
Tish-o-hani-bee. 
Te-ah-pahn-tah. 
Tah-li-yab. 
Took-lah-bee. 
Tus-sah-hah. 
Tah-nap-pe-ho-ja. 
Tith-le-tani-be. 
Tho-po-tubbee. 
Tus-sa-ha. 
Tan-na-pish-wa. 
Ta-nio-la-ho-na. 
Tal-la-hubbee. 
Tlth-lo-ya. 



86 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 



To tn. 

Ta-hom-ba. 

Titli-a-la. 

Tish-!i-ko-niibbee. 

Ta-mo-a-lio-na. 

Tap-pa-non-che-a. 

Tus-ca-no-la. 

Tal-la-wa-ho-na. 

Tish-o-eiuitta. 

Tish-o-chi-le-ta. 

Tuk-a-la-nubbee. 

Tom. 

Tal-wah-ho-ke-ta. 

Te-mah. 

Un-me-hah-to-nah. 

Un-ah. 

Un-tah-she-mah. 

Un-nah-che-he-mah. 

Un-ta-ho-te-ruah. 

Un-tah-tubbe. 

Ul-la-che-mah. 

Un-ah-to-lubbe. 

Un-te-ah-tubbe. 

U-lan-le-tubbe. 

Un-te-cum-e-ubbe. 

U-we-te-mab. 

ITn-ah-to-lubbe. 

Un-ah-le-bo-ka. 

Un-te-ah. 

Un-tah-tubbe. 

Un-te-chubbe. 

Un-che-le. 

Ulth-la-bo-nah. 

Un-te-niah-ho-nah. 

Ush-wah-ho-nab. 

Ut-tut-te-niah. 

Us-tah-hi-ah. 

Ulth-lo-tah. 

Un-ah-tlmah. 

Ut-tut-e-mah. 

tJl-ah-we-lah (or Ah-bo-we 

la). 
Utul-bee (or His-tubbet 

alias Mr. Shoat). 
Ush-wa-tubbee. 
Up-pa-bubbee. 
Un-ah-tubbee. 

Wak-a-tubee. 

Was-kin. 

Wa-ta-ho-yo. 

Washington. 

Wesley 

Wa-to-ho-yo. 

Winna. 

Wausa. 

Wallace. 

Wale. 

Ward. Nicholas. 

Wah-ha-chah. 

Wilson, Tom. 

Wi-o-ka. 

Wah-ki-o-niibbee. 

William. 

Wilson. 



Wah-ah-o-tubbe. 

We-ah-ish-to-nah. 

Wak-ah-che-ho-yo. 

Wak-ah-tubbe. 

Wah-kah-tubbe. 

Wak-ah-ho-nah. 

Wa-tubbe (or Oan-wah- 

tubbe). 
Wah-kah-a-te-mah. 
Wash-ko-mak. 
Wa-li. 

Wah-li (or Billy). 
Wal-lee. 
Wak-a-tu-nah. 
Wa-te-mah. 
Wak-i-chiibbee. 
Wak-i-e-to-nah. 
Wak-i-o-tubbe. 
Wiu-ne. 
Wizy. 

Wah-tubbe. 
Wak-a-to-nah. 
Wak-io-nubbe. 
Way-tubbe. 
Way-ta-ho-nah. 
Way-te-mah. 
Wah-ki-ah. 
Wa-la-ho nab. 
William. 
Wah-kin. 
Willis. 
Wah-tubbe. 
Wak-is-tubbee. 
We-tuck-een-lubbee. 
Wak-ka-te-i-a. 
Wak-i-ah-te-ah. 
Walis. 
Wak-kin. 
William. 
Washington. 
Win-na. 
Wak-a-tubbee. 
Wa-ka-i-on-ubbee. 
Wacka-ya. 
Wa-a-ho-na. 
Wa-chah. 
Wah-ka-ho-ke-tah. 
Wah-ki-o-tubbe. 
We-ah-ho-nah. 
Wa-te-mah. 
Way-tubbe. 

Yalla-ma. 

Yim-me-tubbee. 

Yaco tona. 

Yo-k-odee-tubbee. 

Yaccomma. 

Ya-co-to-na. 

Yak-on-tubbee. 

Yo-ca-ta. 

Yimma-ho-ka. 

Yimma-tubbee. 

Yac-o-tam-ba. 

Yak-a-hajo. 

Ya-ka-pa. 

Yim-ma. 

Yim-min-tah. 



Yock-a-tubbee. 

Yock-a-ma-tubbee. 

Yock-a-ma-tubbee. 

Yocko-tah-nubbee. 

Yo-kah, or Tiyah. 

Yow-wah-to-nah. 

Yun-ma. 

Yon-ah-ti-kah. 

Ye-min-tah-ho-nah. 

Yok-o-tim-ah. 

Yem-e-ti-ah. 

Yim-ish-lah-nah. 

Yok-o-tubbo. 

Yok-ko. 

Yok-o-me-too-nah. 

Yok-o-me-cha-ho-nab. 

Yem-e-ti-ah. 

Yo-bah-tubbee. 

Yim-mo-nubbee. 

Yok-o-me-tim-ah. 

Yok-io-tim-ah. 

Yum-ah-to-nah. 

Yem-ah-ho-ka. 

Yok-ah-ho-nah. 

Yo-ba. 

Yew-o-nubbe. 

Yok-ah-ham-be. 

Yo-hubbe. 

Yon-ah. 

Yon-ah-tah. 

Yon-wah. 

Yun-e-chubbe. 

Yok-a-tubbe. 

Yan-ish-lak-nah. 

Yok-ah-to-nah. 

Yok-o-te-mah. 

Yo-pal-lah. 

Yok-nie-tam-be. 

Yol nubbe. 

Yok-no-la. 

Yem-ak-ah-tubbe. 

Yem-e-tubbe. 

Yok-ah-tubbe. 

Ye-me-tubbe. 

Yah-mak-in-tubbe. 

Yam-moon-tubbee. 

Ye-ah-tam-bee. 

Yazoo-ho-pi-a. 

Yok-me-tubbee. 

Yah-kubbee. 

Yem-e-tubbe. 

Yok-a-tam-be. 

Yok-mi-ti-ah. 

Yock-ma-chuhbee. 

Yim-min-tubbee. 

Yim-ma h-ho-wah. 

Yok-ko-me-ah. 

Yock-ah. 

Yok-a-tam-bee. 

Yo-ka. 

Yahk. 

Yo-pul-lah-ho-nah. 

Yok-o-ta-hah-chubbee. 

Ya-ta. 

Yo-ca-chubbee. 

Yah-ho-ka-te-nah. 

Yock-a-te-nah. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 87 

Mr. Ballixger. "Wliat I was trying to get at was this: Did you 
state to the committee that there were 4,200 persons found prior to 
1852 who were entitled to scrip? 

Mr. Hurley. No, sir ; I did not. 

Mr. BALLI^•GEI{. Well, I was under the impression that you had 
gotten the individuals and heads of families confused in your state- 
ment. 

Mr. Hurley. Well, I had not. I was paying particular attention 
to the enumeration of the scripees and patentees as shown in the 
document which I have submitted for the record. 

I said that there were approximately 3,885 persons identified as 
scripees; that the number of heads of families among those 3,885 
persons was 1,150 or 1,155; in some places it appears as 1,150 and in 
some places it is 1,155; that the number of heads of families who re- 
ceived patents was 143 ; that the number all told who received patents, 
heads of families and members of families, was 276 ; amounting in all 
to approximately 4,161 persons. 

Mr. Chairman. I would like now to consider the statements that 
have been made in regard to a certain release whicli was passed by a 
Choctaw Council in regard to the $872,000 scrip payment, not that 
this release or statement made in connection with it has any rele- 
vancy to the issues in this case, but because it has been brought into 
the argument by the proponents of the bill. 

The so-called net proceeds case was a case against the United 
States to recover from the United States for the Choctaw Nation the 
amount of money due for lands ceded to the United States by the 
Choctaws by the treaty of 1830. 

The Choctaw Nation recovered from the United States the value 
of that land, less the amount of the land which was taken to satisfy 
the fourteenth article claimants and the other claimants in Missis- 
sippi. Consequently, the Choctaw Nation recovered nothing for the 
fourteenth ai'ticle claimants; nothing for any of the other claimants 
not then in Indian Territory, excepting these 292 heads of families 
who were claimants under the fourteenth article, but got neither land, 
money, nor scrip. 

Then any claim of any person in Mississippi to citizenship in the 
Choctaw Nation must rest on his right imder the fourteenth article, 
and that case did not affect any of the rights under that article. Con- 
sequently it has no relevancy to the issues here. If any of those 292 
persons for whom the Choctaw Nation recovered money from the 
United States has not received their portion of it, they may have a 
cause of action against the Choctaw Nation for their proportion 
which they did not receive, but not a cause of action for citizenship. 
We are now considering their right to citizenship. 

Mr. Ballinoeij. They can not bring any action without authority 
of law, can they? 

]\fr. Hurley. AVell, you have not any authority of law to appear 
here, Mr. Ballinger. You violate the very statute that first mentions 
the Mi'-sispippi Choctaws in connection with enrollment in the Choc- 
taw Ti'ibe in the West, in appearing as their attorney. 

Mr. Ballinoer. Do you think that is a fair answer to my question? 

Mr. Hurley. If you want to proceed to collect any money claimed 
to be due, you are proceeding in the wrong Avay, in trying to get citi- 
zenship for them. Why do you not ask authority to go to the Court 



88 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

of Claims? The Court of Claims would certainly have jurisdiction, 
if it was conferred on it by act of Congress, to pass upon such a 
claim. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Hurley, these people have endeavored for 18 
years to get their case before the Court of Claims, and each time that 
request has been denied. 

Mr. Hurley. Now, Mr. Ballinger. that is one of the broad state- 
ments that I have listened to a irreat many times since the beginning 
of these hearings ; and yet you have not during this entire hearing, 
asked this committee to refer this case or any other case to the Court 
of Claims. 

Mr. Ballinger. Well, I ask, then, now, if it is in order to do so. 

Mr. HinjLEV. Well. Avhy do you say that you have asked that for 
18 years? You have not said one word about referring the case to 
the Court of Claims. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Hurley, in 1800. in 1900, and subsequent to 
that time, bills were introduced and Avere reported out of one com- 
mittee or the other, referring these matters to the Court of Claims, 
but those bills never got any further. 

Mr. Hurley. Well, I do not Jcnow whether there were such bills 
or not; I have never seen any of them. 

Mr. Ballinger. Well, I have. 

Mr. Hurley. And it is certainly in order for you to ask for a ref- 
erence to the Court of Claims in this instance; but you have not 
shown or attempted to show that 3^ou have a cause of action; 
if you want the right to go to the Court of Claims, you would prob- 
ably have to show to this committee that the records showing the 
})ayment of that $417,000 are fraudulent; you would have to show 
that those people did not get their money ; they would have to show 
the amount that they did get and the amount they did not get, and 
then they Avould have to ask this committee to refer the case to the 
Court of Claims for that amount, to determine whether or not the 
claimants are entitled to it. 

Mr. Ballinger. Now, let me ask you one question that T have had 
in mind during the entire course of this hearing: The Choctaws 
acquired their Vv^'estern lands by a cession of a part of their lands 
East, did they not, under the treaty of 1830? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes; 1820 and 1830. 

Mr. Ballinger. The Mississippi Choctaws had an interest in the 
lands ceded in Mississippi, did they not? 

Mr. Ballinger. Now, let me ask you one question that T haA'e had 
in mind throughout the entire course of this hearing. The Choc- 
taws acquired their western lands by a cession of a part of their 
lands east, did they not? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Ballinger. Under the treaty of 1820? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir; but that title was readjusted by the treaty 
of 1830. 

Mr. Balijnger. The Mississippi Choctaws had an interest in th« 
land ceded in Mississippi, did they not? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

^fr. Ballinger. Then the western lands were bought and paid for 
by an exchange of property in which the Mississippi Choctaws had 
an actual interest? 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 89 

A 
Mr. Hurley. Mr. Ballinger, you are attempting to pervert the 
facts to show that these people in Mississippi who received their por- 
tion of the tribal estate also retained an interest in the tribal prop- 
erty west. The facts are against you. When the treaty of September 
27, 1830, Avas negotiated this is the statement made by the commis- 
sioners to those people : 

By direction of your great father we have come ainougst you. It is not your 
lands we seelv, but your happiness. If you remain you will be subject to the 
jurisdiction of courts, pay taxes, etc., and if you are satisfied that in such a 
condition you would be unhappy, then agree to remove beyond the Mississippi, 
where you will be able to live under your own laws. Record the votes of your 
headmen and let us know who is willing to move and who are opposed. In 1S20, 
by a treaty, a fine country was given you for the use of your people. It was the 
understanding at that time that the Choctaws would remove. Ten years are 
passed and j'ou are still here. If you prefer to live here, surrender the lands 
west or otherwise remove to them. Hereafter we will not treat with you. (21 
C. CIS. Rep., p. 61.) 

Even to tlie untutored mind of the Indian this language could 
not be misunderstood. There was presented the alternative of re- 
maining in Mississippi, forfeiting the lands which the.y had acquired 
by solemn compact in the West, becoming subject to the white man's 
laws, to the jurisdiction of his courts and to taxation, or leaving 
their homes in Mississippi and removing to their territorv in the 
West. 

The Choctaws were surprised at the proposition and representa- 
tions of the commissioners in regard to the forfeiture by them of 
their lands in the West if they did not remove to them, as no such 
condition had been placed in the treaty of 1820, and at first refused 
to treat with the commissioners of the United States. The com- 
missioners thereupon threatened to withdraw and no longer treat 
with them, and a few days later the Choctaws, being fearful of the 
consequences of their refusal, presented certain proposals for a 
treaty of their own accord. They agreed that their people would 
remove to their lands west of the Mississippi, but demanded that 
those M'ho had improvements in Mississippi and were willing to 
remove should be granted certain reservations, the amount of the 
reserve being dependent upon the acreage under cultivation, and 
insisted that those who desired to remain should also be taken care 
of, with the understanding that they should become citizens of the 
State in which they resided and thereby subject to all the laws of 
said State. That part of their proposal bearing on this subject is as 
follows : 

Also, such persons wishing to become citizens, and who are heads of families, 
shall be entitled, for himself or herself, to a section of land; and having lived 
upon and cultivated the same for six years after the ratification of this treaty, 
shall receive a grant in fee; the location .shall be bounded by sectional lines and 
Include his or her dwelling. (21 C. Cls. Rep., p. 03.) 

The treaty was finally concluded on September 27, 1830, and the 
proposals of the Choctaws were in a measure adopted. Two clas.ses 
of reservations were provided for by the treaty. Article 14, under 
which the Mississippi Choctaw claim arises, is as follows: 

Art. 14. Each Choctaw head of a family being desirous to remain and become 
a citizen of the States shall be permitted to do so by signifying his Inten- 
tion to the agent within .six months from the ratification of this treaty, and 
he or she shall thereupon be entitled to a reservation of one section of G40 



90 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES, 

ncres of land, to be bounded by sectional lines of survey; in like manner shall 
be entitled to one-half that quantity for each unuiiirried child which is living 
with him over 10 years of age, and a quarter section to such child as may be 
under 10 years of age, to adjoin the location of the parent. If they reside upon 
said lands, intending to become citizens of the States, for five years after the 
ratification of this treaty, in that case a grant in fee simple shall issue; said 
reservation shall include the present improvement of the head of the family, or 
a portion of it. Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privi- 
lege of a Choctaw citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any 
portion of the Choctaw annuity. (7 Stat. L., 335.) 

This article provides for those who desired to remain and become 
citizens of the States, Article 19 provides for reservations to those 
who intended to remove and had improvements in Mississippi. 

A number of Indians decided that they would take advantage of 
the inducements offered by the fourteenth article and would become 
citizens of the United States and of the State of Mississippi and 
remain in Mississippi, where they could enjoy all of the advantages 
of a civilized community ; and in addition to all of these advantages 
the head of each family was to receive 640 acres of land for himself 
and one-half of that amount for each child over 10 years of age and 
160 acres for each child under 10 years of age. They were to receive 
this land in lieu of their interest in all tribal property. Those who 
attempted to avail themselves of the right to remain in Mississippi 
and take their share of the tribal property were not fairly dealt with 
by the United States Government. A few of them did get the land 
they were entitled to, but those who remained and did not get land 
under the fourteenth article were given scrip with which they could 
have taken up land on the public domain. The record shows that 
they parted with this scrip. They were given money in lieu of the 
second half of the scrip which they were entitled to. They accepted 
this scrip and money in lieu of the land which they were entitled to. 
This money and scrip was paid them by the United States, but was 
given them out of Choctaw property as their proportionate share of 
the Choctaw tribal estate, and the tJnited States Government after- 
wards charged the Choctaw Nation with $1,749,900 for the money 
and scrip issued to fourteenth article claimants. 

Now, it may be shown that the citizens of Mississippi and the 
Government of the United States have prevented the fourteenth 
article Mississippi Choctaws from enjoying the property to which 
they were entitled under the treaty, but the ChoctaAv Nation had no 
hand in preventing them from getting their property, and the Choc- 
taw Nation has been charged up not with what the fourteenth article 
claimants actually received, but with what they were entitled to 
receive, so if they have not received what they were entitled to 
receive, their claim is clearly against the United States and not 
against the Choctaw Nation. 

The injustice of the situation is this: That these same persons who 
did receive land, scrip, and money afterwards did remove to the 
Choctaw Nation, and almost without exception these fourteenth 
article claimants and their descendants are now enrolled members 
of the Choctaw Nation, sharing equally in the tribal property of 
Oklahoma with the Oklahoma Choctaws. The treaty specifically 
provided that if they ever removed they were not to be entitled to 
any of the annuities belonging to the Oklahoma Choctaws. There 
is some question as to what is meant by annuities. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 91 

The Indians construe " annuity " to mean am^^ money that is paid 
them by the United States Government, no matter from what source. 
Undoubtedly the $400,000 annuity which was to be paid the Choctav>'s 
of OMahoma for the cession of their Land in Mississippi under the 
treaty of 1830 was a paid consideration for the land which they 
ceded. This is the only kind of annuity that the Choctaw Nation 
or the Choctaw people had any knowledge of — that is, consideration 
to be paid them for land which they sold. 

It is reasonable to contend, as it has been contended, that those 
who claimed imder the fourteenth article should not lose the privilege 
of ChoctaAv citizenship — that is, the privilege to remove to the Choc- 
taw Nation and enjoy the communal benefits of the Choctaw land, 
but the fourteenth article also said that " if they ever remove, 
are not to be entitled to any portion of the Choctaw annuity." Then, 
strictly speaking, even the fourteenth article claimants would not be 
entitled to any of the money derived from the sale of any Choctaw 
property for the reason that they had received their share of all the 
property that the Choctaw Nation 

Mr. Ballinoer. Now, Mr. Hurley, you have not answered my 
question, and I want to put it again, now, so there may be no doubt 
about it. 

By the treaty of 1820 the Choctaws ceded a part of their lands east 
for all the territory now in Oklahoma and additional lands. At 
that time the INIississippi Choctaws, the present claimants here, were 
a part owner of the lands exchanged for the western lands. By the 
decision in the case of Choctaw Nation v. The United States, the 
Supreme Court held that it was under that treaty that the Choctaws 
acquired the title to the Avestern lands. Now, I want to know whether 
or not the Mississippi Choctaws, whose lands Avere taken and ex- 
changed for the Avestern lands, haA^e eA^er receiA-ed a dollar for that 
transaction. 

Mr. Hurley. If you have paid some attention to the statement I 
haA^e made, you would understand that the Mississippi Choctaws, to 
whom you refer, received $1,749,900 in scrip and money in addition 
to land they received as their proportionate share of all the property 
that the Choctaw Nation ownecl in 1830; that they receiA^ed this 
under the treaty of September 27, 1830, and that in consideration of 
this scrip and money and land they relinquished whatever interest 
they had in the lands west. Prior to the making of the treaty of 1830 
the GoA'ernment commission advised the Choctaws, as I haA-e already 
set forth in this record, that they must surrender the land west or 
move upon it. Those avIio did not move upon it unquestionably did 
surrendei" their interest to it, as that was the purpose for whicli the 
Government made the treaty; but all the ChoctaAvs Avho Avere in 
Mississippi in 1830 Avere told that they could do one of two things. 
The first Avas to remove to Indian Territory and live upon the land 
Avhich had been gi\en them there. The second Avas to remain in 
Mississippi and i-elinquish their right to the land Avest and take their 
proportionate share of the tribal estate under the provisions of article 
14 of the treaty. 

Mr. r>.\i. LINGER. Mr. Hurley, that is Avhere I think j^ou are con- 
fusing the issue. Noav, let me proceed just with another question: 
By the treaty of 1830 another cession of lands Avas made, and from 
the cession Ihen made the Mississippi Choctaws acquired, or Avere 



92 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

entitled to acquire, allotments out of the lands then ceded, but that 
had no connection with the previous transaction. Now, I would like 
for you to explain those two transactions squarely to the committee. 

Mr. HuKLEY. Now, Mr. Chairman, if there was any merit in the 
questions asked by Mr. Ballinger, the Court of Claims and the Su- 
preme Court of the United States Avould certainly have recognized 
it before this late day. The nature of the title that the Choctaws 
held to the land in Mississippi has been considered in a number of 
cases, especially in the Choctaw Nation v. The United States (119 
U. S., 1). The question was also raised in regard to the so-called 
leased district claim. It was claimed that the Mississippi Choctaws 
had some interest in the land west, because that land was acquired 
by the Choctaw Nation under the terms of the treaty of 1830. 

Mr. Ballinger. Were the Mississippi Choctaws parties to that 
suit? 

Mr. Hurley. The reason they were not parties was the very reason 
that you are trjdng to make appear to exist in their favor. The 
reason they were not parties to any of the treaties or litigation affect- 
ing the Choctaw lands west, after the treaty of 1830, was because 
they had been offered the alternative of surrendering the lands in 
the West, or moving upon them, or to remain in Mississippi and 
take their distributive share of all the tribal property and become 
citizens of the State of Mississippi. They declined to go to the land 
in the West and live upon it, and in lieu of their interest in that land 
and all other land ceded in Mississippi they took 640 acres of land in 
Mississippi for each head of a family; 320 for each child over 10, 
and 160 acres for each child under 10, That was the consideration 
paid them for the relinquishment of any rights they had to the land 
in the West which was originally acquired under the terms of the 
treaty of 1820, and the title to which was readjusted and modified 
by an agreement between these same Mississippi Choctaws who were 
members of the Choctaw Tribe and the United States; and in this 
agreement they were given the privilege, imder article 14, to remain 
in Mississippi and take the land as I have stated. They availed them- 
selves of this privileged and relinquished their right to the property 
in the West. They allowed themselves to become individualized citi- 
zens of the United States in the State of Mississippi, no longer mem- 
bers of a tribe or entitled to any of the privileges of citizensliip in 
the tribe unless i\\ej removed to the Choctaw Nation. They were 
afraid to trust the' United States Government and the people^ of 
Mississippi, so they reserved to themselves the privilegeof reaffiliat- 
ing themselves with the Choctaw Tribe in the West in case they 
should be dispossessed of the property reserved to them under the 
fourteenth article. 

The United States Government or the citizens of Mississippi have 
not treated them fairly, but the United States Government has 
charged the Choctaw Nation with every dollar that these Mississippi 
Choctaws were entitled to; so their distributive share has really 
come out of the Choctaw estate, whetlier the United States has iriven 
the Mississippi Choctaws the benefit of it or not. This right that 
they reserved to themselves of the privilege of reaffiliating them- 
selves with the Choctaw Nation was, as I have stated, the right to 
remove to the Choctaw Nation and enjoy the communal benefits of 
the land; but there is grave question if after removal to the Choc- 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 9S 

taw Nation they would be entitled to any part of the money re- 
ceived for the sale of the residue of tribal property for the reason 
that such funds are what the Choctaws have always called and con- 
sidered annuities, and the fourteenth article under which these per- 
sons claimed specifically prohibited them from the right to partici- 
pate in the distribution of annuities. 

Mr. Ballinger. Now, Mr. Hurley, possibly I have not been able 
to follow you and grasp the full significance of your statement, but 
now, under the treaty of 1820, the Mississippi Choctaws did have 
an interest in the western lands. Now then, will you state under 
what treat}^, and if so, read the provision by which they extinguished 
their rights in the western lands acquired under the treaty of 1820? 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Ballinger, you contend that under the treaty of 
1820 the Choctaw Nation ceded the United States Government about 
4,000,000 acres of land in the State of Mississippi. As a considera- 
tion for that cession the United States gave the Choctaw Nation in 
the Indian Territory whatever it was — I forget how many millions 
of acres — something like 20,000,000 of acres, was it not? 

Mr. Ballinger. Correct. 

Mr. Carter. Then, as a nation, every individual who is a Choctaw 
in Mississippi in 1820 had in equity — probably had — an interest in 
the Indian Territory land that the United States Government had 
ceded to them. 

Mr. Ballinger. That is precisely what I am trying to get at. 

Mr. Carter. Did not that treaty recite that the western lands 
were set aside only for those who would not work and lived by fish- 
ing and hunting, and that was the only class contemplated to be 
removed by that treaty? 

Mr. Hurley. It said also, and the deed giving the Indians that 
land, conveying it to them and their heirs so long as they exist as a 
nation and live upon it. 

Mr. Ballinger. There never was a deed under the treaty of 1820. 
The treaty itself operated to pass the title. 

Mr. Hurley. Do you mean that the Choctaws have never had a 
deed to the land? 

Mr. Carter. They got a deed in eighteen forty-three. 

Mr. Hurley. In 1843. 

Mr. Ballinger. That was the conveyance under the treaty of 1830, 
not 1820. 

Mr. Hurley. According to your argument, which is entirely in- 
correct, they did not receive the land in 1820. 

Mr. Ballinger. But just one moment. I will make that perfectly 
plain. By the treaty of 1820, under the ruling of the Supreme Court 
of the United States in Choctaw v. United States, the western lands 
were acquii-ed by purchase under the treaty of 1820. Subsequently, 
the Government of the United States desired to acquire all the 
remainder of their lands, and then entered into a new treaty in which 
it purported to cede the same lands in the West that it had previously 
ceded by the treaty of 1820 as a consideration for the lands ceded by 
the Choctaws in Mississippi under the treaty of 1830. That ques- 
tion was directly in issue in Choctaw Nation v. United States, and 
the Supreme Court held that there was no cession of that land under 
the treaty of 1830, but that the land was ceded and paid for under 
the treaty of 1820. 



94 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. Post. I think you are mistaken about that. 

Mr. Ballinger. If so, then I am wrong throughout. 

Mr. Post, I think in the Choctaw Nation v. United States case 
it held that the consideration 

Mr. Ballinger. They say it was under the treaty of 1820. 

Mr. Post. The consideration for the 10,000,000 acres of land that 
was ceded in 1830 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Post, the recovery of $8,000,000 for the 10,- 
€00,000 acres of land ceded in 1830 was because of the fact that the 
United States had given the territory west to the Choctaws for the 
cession of 4,000,000 acres of land in 1820. 

Mr. RiCHARDsox. That is what everybody agrees on, then? 

Mr. Ballinger. What is that? 

Mr. Richardson. That the territory w^est was ceded under the 
treaty of 1820. 

Mr. Ballinger. That is my contention. 

Mr. Richardson. The deed so occasioned — pardon the interrup- 
tion — by the passage of an act of Congress in May, 1830, providing 
for the giving of deeds to Indian tribes for land to which they were 
entitled by cession after the treaty of 1830, that act — the language 
of that act — was incorporated, I think, in one section 

Mr. Carter. The patent was not executed until after 1830. 

Mr. Richardson. No; the act of May, 1830, was the occasion for 
the patent. 

Mr. Posr. Mr. Ballinger, if I understand it rightly, the recovery 
in the net-proceeds case was upon the basis that 10,000,000 acres 
that were ceded in 1830 by the Indians was without any considera- 
tion. 

Mr. Ballinger. Certainly ; the consideration had passed under the 
treaty of 1820. 

Mr. Post. Yes. 

Mr. Ballinger. They bought and paid for the western lands un- 
der the treaty of 1820. 

Mr. Post. Now, under the treaty of 1820 they came by this Okla- 
homa country for the 4,000,000 acres ceded in 1820? 

Mr. Ballinger. That is correct. 

Mr. Post, When it came to 1830, and the United States author- 
ities being anxious to induce these Indians all to go out to Okla- 
homa, they ran up against the proposition that a lot of them de- 
murred to it and did not want to go; and did not they in that treaty 
make provision to satisfy them for whatever interest they had in 
the Oklahoma country? 

Mr, Ballinger, Absolutely no provision whatsoever. 

Mr. Post. "VVliat was the consideration to the United States Gov- 
ernment for giving each family 640 acres and the other provisions? 

Mr. Ballinger.Iu 1830, when that treaty was negotiated, there 
were still some 10,000,000 acres of land remaining unceded in the 
State of Mississippi. That land belonged to the Choctaw Nation, 
and, of course, the Mississippi Choctaw, commonly known 

Mr. Post. Ten millions of acres of land left? 

Mr. Ballinger. After the first cession of 4,000,000 acres in 1820 
there were then 10,000,000 acres left. 

Mr, Carter, Eleven million. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 96 

Mr. Ballinger. Whatever it was, ten or eleven million, remaining 
imceded. Now, the Choctaw who remained there took his portion 
of that land ; that is, the 10,000,000 acres, as an allotment and as his 
share of the ceded land under the treaty of 1830, and it had no 
possible connection with the cession of the 4,000,000 acres of land 
made under the treaty of 1820, which was in compensation for the 
western lands ; that is the basis of our claim. The Indian who took 
an allotment of 640 acres under the treaty of 1830 still retained his 
interest in the within lands. 

Mr. Carter. Let me ask you: Did the treaty of 1820 exchange 
4,000,000 acres of land in Mississippi for the reservation in the west ? 

Mr. Ballinger. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Now, by the treatv of 1830, the Choctaw Nation ceded 
11,000,000 acres of land? 

Mr. Ballinger. About that. 

Mr. Carter. Now, what was the consideration for that ? 

Mr. Ballinger. There was absolutely no consideration for that, 
and the judgment rendered 

Mr. Carter (interrupting). Simply an annuity provided in the 
treaty ? 

Mr. Ballinger (continuing). And the judgment rendered in the 
case of Choctaw Nation v. United States was the compensation for 
the land ceded under the treaty of 1830. 

Mr. Carter. That was what I was getting at. 

Mr. Ballinger. So that 

Mr. Carter. Now, let us get that straight. The judgment, ren- 
dered in the net proceeds case then, or a part of it, was for the 
payment of lands ceded by the Choctaws by the treaty of 1830? At 
a certain price per acre, the expenses of certifying, etc., to be taken 
off the price before the net amount was paid the Choctaw Nation? 

Mr. Ballinger. Yes, sir ; that is correct. 

Mr. Carter. But under the treaty, it is your contention there was 
really no consideration made to the Choctaws. 

Mr. Ballinger. Under the treaty of 1830 the Choctaws were de- 
ceived, as the Supreme Court, in the case of Choctaw Nation v. 
United States, subsequently held. The Choctaw Nation, upon the 
representations read by Mr. Hurley, were led to believe that they 
had not acquired a good title to their western lands under the treaty 
of 1820, and were thereby induced to cede the remainder of their 
lands in Mississippi, under the treaty of 1830 as further compensa- 
tion for the western lands, but the Supreme Court, in the case of 
Choctaw Nation v. United States, held that the western lands were 
bought and fully paid for by the exchange made under the treaty of 
1820, and that the Choctaws had never received any consideration for 
the 10,000,000 acres of land ceded under the treaty "of 1830, and that's 
the very crux of this case. 

Mr. Post. Well, Mr. Ballinger, take the situation of an Indian in 
1830, immediately prior to the entering into the treaty. That In- 
dian, according to your contention, not only had an interest in the 
Oklahoma estate, but he had an interest in the 10,000,000 acres re- 
maining in the State of Mississippi. 

Mr. Ballinger. That is correct. That is our contention. 



96 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. Post. Now, let me put this question to you : Was he not pro- 
vided for; was his interest not paid for, in both estates, by the 
treaty of 1830? 

Mr. B.\LLixc;i:i{. No, sir. His interest only in the 10,000,000 acres 
ceded under the treaty of 1830 was to be paid for by an allotment, 
and there is not a scintilla of evidence that the allotment then re- 
ceived was considered by anyone at that time as compensation for 
bis rights in the western lands. If it is now claimed otherwise, it is 
at least incumbent upon the Choctaw attorneys to come forward with 
that evidence. 

Mr. Post. Xow, i\Ir. Ballinger, under the treaty of 1820, what pro- 
vision was made for the Mississippi Choctaw that remained in Missis- 
sippi ? 

Mr. Balltnger. By the treaty of 1820 remoy^al of the entire tribe 
or even a considerable portion of the tribe was not even contemplated. 

Mr. Post. I know, but what provision for those who remained 
behind ? 

Mr. Ballikoek. By the treaty of 1820 the western lands were ac- 
quired as a hunting ground for the Choctaw, who lived by hunting 
and would not work. 

Mr. Post. Yes. 

Mr. Ballixger. And were held and owned by them in common, or 
by the tribes in common. 

Mr. Hurley. Now, Mr. Ballinger, you said a while ago that the 
western lands were acquired in 1820 for those who would not work 
and lived by hunting. 

Mr. Ballinger. The treaty so recites. 

Mr. Hurley. Now, you claim that no one has an interest in it 
except those of the Mississippi Choctaws who live now by hunting, 
and will not work. No Mississippi Choctaws now lives by hunting; 
that makes your argument ridiculous. 

Mr. Ballinger. I did not say that. The land was acquired by the 
ChoctaAv Nation, and was purchased and acquired for the purpose 
of transporting those Indians Avho would not work and who live by 
fishing and hunting, where they might have a home over there, but 
the Choctaw Nation owned it. 

Mr. Carter. But just a moment. I understood you to say just a 
moment ago that you did not contemplate that any of them should 
move to this land as acquired for a hunting ground under the treaty 
of 1820? 

]\Ir. Ballinger. Only the removal of those who would not work 
and liA'ed by fishing and hunting was contemplated. 

Mr. Post. What was the condition? 

Mr. Ballinger. It was owned by the Choctaw Nation and used 
for that purpose, the same as their funds might have been used for 
the education or support of a certain class of the Choctaws, but it 
still remained the property of the Choctaw Indians. 

Mr. Hurley Now, Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ballinger argued that before. 

Mr. Ballinger. You promised that you would answer it squarely. 
Now, I would like to have j'^ou do so. 

Mr. Hurley. As a matter of fact, Mr. Ballinger will not accept 
any legal answer to any of his arguments. He takes the position 
that the land acquired in 1820 was acquired for those who lived 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 97 

by hunting, and who would not work. We have shown this commit- 
tee, or attempted to show it, that the fourteenth-article claimants, 
the nineteenth-article claimants, and the supplementary-article claim- 
ants of the treaty of 1830 received out of the lands then belonging 
to the Choctaw Nation their distributive portion of the property of 
that tribe, no matter where located. They did accept that on the 
condition that if they ever removed to the Indian Territory in the 
West, they should not lose the privilege of a citizen. 

Mr. Post, If I understand you right, Mr. Hurley, the situation of 
the Indian was this: Up until 1830 the Choctaw Nation owned 
Avhatever land remained and had not been ceded by the treaty of 
1820 in Mississippi, and the Choctaw Nation owned the Oklahoma 
country ? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Post. But in the treaty of 1830 all the property that was 
owned by the Choctaw Nation was ceded to the United States Gov- 
ernment, with the exception of such of the property as was retained 
under the provision of the treaty by which the heads of the families 
under the fourteenth article received 640 acres and other members 
of their families lesser amounts. 

Mr. HuRLF.Y. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Post. Now. if an Indian in that condition elected to remain, 
he had his right to do so? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Post. And therefore his entire interest in the estate was wiped 
out by his own selection? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir ; he had a right to choose whether he would 
go to the Indian Territory and become a citizen there with all the 
privileges of citizenship, or take his 640 acres of land in Missis- 
sippi as his distributive share of all the property belonging to the 
tribe 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. 



Mr. Hurley. Just wait a minute, Mr. Ballinger; you will not 
allow me to answer your question. I am sure that the committee 
fully understands my contention as to what privilege was reserved 
to the fourteenth-article claimants, but I will repeat my contention 
for Mr. Ballinger's information. 

The fourteenth article did reserve to them the right to remove 
to the Choctaw Nation, and after removal to be entitled to the 
privileges of Choctaw citizenship, save a right to participate in 
Choctaw annuities. The time within which they could have exer- 
cised the privilege of removing has expired. The land has been 
alk)tted in severalty; the tribal governments have been dissolved. 
There is no longer governmental authority of anv nature vested in 
the tribal governments. There is, of course, a governor of the 
Chickasaws and a principal chief of the Choctaws vested with au- 
thority under the laws of the United States to execute conveyances 
of tribal property, but there is no judicial, executive, or legislative 
authority existing in the tribal organization. 

The title to the residue of tribal property is vested with certain 
limitations, as I have heretofore shown, in the enrolled inttividual 
members of the tribe. Therefore if there were any fourteenth- 
article claimants now residing in Mississippi (which we do not admit; 

88855—15 7 



98 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

I believe we have shown all fourteenth-article claimants are now in 
the Choctaw Xation), they could not exercise the privilege which 
they had reserved to them. This privilege was reserved to the 
fourteenth-article claimants and their heirs for almost a century 
before the allotment of the land of the Choctaw Nation in severalty. 
If they have never availed themselves of the privilege, it is now too 
late for them to do it. You speak of the rights of these indi- 
viduals. I hope the committee fairly understands in the first place 
that they did not have a right. They had a privilege to remove 
to the Choctaw Nation, and after having done so the privilege of 
becoming citizens. These Avere conditions precedent after the per- 
formance of which they would have the equitable rights of Choctaw 
citizens. They Avere not citizens of the Choctaw Nation at any time 
after the treaty of 1830, unless they removed to the Choctaw Nation 
West, and reaffiliated themselves with the tribe. The deed by which 
the land now belonging to the Choctaw Nation was. conveyed to the 
Choctaws contains this language : 

In fee to them and their descendants to inure to them while they shall exist 
as a nation and live npon it. 

The Mississippi Choctaws have never lived upon this land. They 
have been individual citizens of the State of Mississippi, and have 
not existed as a nation since 1830. In 1830 they were given the 
privilege of removing to this land or to surrender it and remain 
in Mississippi and obtained certain privileges under article 14 of 
the treaty of September 27, 1830. They elected to remain in ^Mis- 
sissippi, and they did accept the privileges extended them under 
the fourteenth article. They retained, of course, the privilege of 
reaffiliating themselves with the Choctaw Nation and becoming 
citizens under certain conditions, but these were conditions that 
existed nearly a century ago. They do not now exist. It is there- 
fore impossible for them now to exercise the privilege they retained. 
I The right to affiliate themselves with the Choctaw Nation and 
become citizens was reserved only to fourteenth-article claimants. 
11 It was not reserved to claimants under the nineteenth and other 
articles of the treaty. It seems to be admitted that all fourteenth- 
article claimants, or their descendants, are now in the Choctaw 
Nation, consequently there is no one in Mississippi who can claim 
the privilege extended to fourteenth-article claimants; but if there 
are descendants of any fourteenth-article claimants now residing in 
Mississippi their equitable and moral right to participation in the 
distribution of Choctaw property was exhausted by their accept- 
ance of their proportionate share of all of the property that the 
Choctaw Nation oAvned in 1830. 

Mr. Ballinger. Now, Mr. Hurley, under what provision of law 
did that come? 

Mr. Hurley. The distribution of their proportionate share of the 
tribal property among them Avas provided for by article 14 of the 
treaty of 1830 and by the nineteenth and supplementary articles of 
the same treatv; bv the act of congress approved Februarv 22, 1838 
(5 Stat. L.. 2il) ;■ the act of Congress approved March 3, 1837 (5 
Stat. L., 180) ; the act of Congress approved August 23, 1842 (5 Stat. 
L., 513) ; the act of Congress approved March 3, 1845 (5 Stat. L., 
777) ; the act of Congress approved July 21, 1852 (10 Stat. L., 10) : 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 99 

the act of Congress approved August 30, 1852 (10 Stat. L., 42) ; and 
the act of Congress approved March 3, 1853 (10 Stat. L., 237). 

Under this treaty and these acts the fourteenth article Mississippi 
Choctaw claimants received land and scrip and money in lieu of 
their share of the tribal property of the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Ballinger. Now, I hand you article 14 of the treaty of 1830, 
and you read to the committee any provision contained in that article 
that extinguished their rights acquired under the treaty of 1820. 

Mr. Hurley. I have read that to the committee. 

jNIr. Post. It would not say in express words that that was in com- 
plete extinguishment of afl the property right they had in the nation, 
but it did make an express provision there for the Indian who elected 
to remain in Mississippi. 

Mr. Hurley. And gave them a right to take twice as much land 
as citizens of the Choctaw Nation west are now receiving as allot- 
ments. The argument that they have a claim to citizenship in the 
Choctaw Nation because the United States prevented them from 
receiving this land and the people of Mississippi robbed them of 
their scrip and money is absurd. If people of ISIississippi and the 
Government of the United States perpetrated any fraud on the ISlis- 
sissippi Choctaws after they elected to take their portion of the 
estate, their claim is against the United States and the people of 
Mississippi and not against the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Post, under the treaty of 1830, by the second 
article, or by the third article, the Choctaws ceded all of their re- 
maining lands east of the Mississippi River to the Government, 
amounting, in the aggregate, to some ten or eleven million acres. 
Now, here is the provision contained with reference to those who 
desired to remain east, and I submit that this provision related only 
to the acquisition of their share of the property ceded, which they 
took in lieu of participating in any funds that might have been 
derived therefrom : 

Each Clioctaw head of a family being desirous to remain and become a citizen 
of the States shall be permitted to do so by signifying his intention to 
the agent within six months from the ratification of this treaty. He or she 
shall thereupon be entitled to a reservation of one section of 040 acres of land, 
to be l)ounded by sectional lines of survey. In like manner shall be entitled 
to one-half that quantity for each unmarried child which is living with him 
over 10 years of age, and a quarter section to each child as may be under 
10 years of age, to adjoin the location of the parent. If they reside upon said 
lands, "intending to become citizens of the States, for five years after the 
latification of this treaty, in that case a grant in fee simple shall issue; said 
leservation shall include the present improvement of the head of the f.-imily, 
or a portion of it. Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the 
privilege of a Choctaw citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled 
to any portion of the Choctaw annuity. 

Now, by this provision they were given lands in Mississippi, and 
then provision was made that they should share in those western 
lands. 

Mr. Hurley. That statement is absolutely incorrect. 

Mr. Post. Now, you are lawyer enough (o read that treaty from the 
four corners and understand that all the interest you have, if you 
elect to remain in Mississippi under tlie terms of the agreeuient, is 
the provision made there, is it not? Tlii? Indian who elected to re- 
main, under the treaty, in Mississippi was to get nothing more than 
provided for in the treat}'. 



100 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. Ballinoer. But they were dealing in 1830 only with the re- 
maining ten or eleven million acres of land. 

Mr, Post. How was that? 

Mr. Ballinger. That treaty of 1830 dealt only with the residue 
lands, aggregating ten or eleven million acres. 

Mr. Post. The treaty of 1830 is rather supplementary to the other 
treaty. 

Mr. Ballinger. I think the two should be considered together, 
and when considered together I think they make a perfect case in 
support of our contention. , 

Air. Post. I would not agree upon your construction. That would 
depend on his right of removal. 

Mr. Ballinger. Beg pardon? 

Mr. Post. I would not agree with your construction. That would 
depend upon his right of removal. In order to become a citizen — 
after he had elected once to become a citizen of the State of Missis- 
sippi — in order to become a citizen of the Choctaw Nation the pre- 
requisite of the residence attaches under that section. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Post, you are now discussing a question of 
citizenship. Now^, property rights might or might not flow from 
citizenship. 

Mr. Post. He could not have property rights in a nation unless a 
citizen of that nation. 

Mr. Ballinger. In these communal lands, where the property has 
been purchased with the common funds of an Indian tribe, and the 
tribe has subsequently become divided, Congress has almost invaria- 
bly recognized the division and the rights of the parties — of the 
respective factions of the tribe which have become separated — to all 
share in the funds. 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Ballinger, is not whatever right the Mississippi 
ChoctaAv has under this article based on the right of citizenship? 

Mr. Ballinger. Citizenship at the time the property was acquired. 

Mr. Carter. How do you construe this language : " Persons who 
claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw 
Indian, but if they ever remove they shall not lose any right of a 
Choctaw citizen " ? Do you not base on that ? 

Mr. Ballinger. That is not the provision I have been basing the 
claim of my clients upon. 

Mr. Carter. Well, then, you discard this portion of it and do not 
assert any claim under that? 

Mr. Ballinger. I do not think the portion you have just read is 
material to the claim here of our clients. 

Mr. Carter. Well, then, on what part of the treaty of 1830 do you 
base the claim of your clients? 

Mr. Ballinger. I am not basing a claim under the treaty of 1830, 
but under the treaty of 1820. 

Mr. Carter. But, Mr. Ballinger, you have just read the fourteenth 
article of the treaty of 1830, as I understand it, as a basis for your 
claim? 

Mr. Ballinger. No; I Avas reading that to show that both Con- 
gress and the Choctaw Nation at that time (1830) recognized they 
had rights in the western lands. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 101 

Mr. Carter. Yes. Now, what rights are recognized? They must, 
by the language of this, be based upon citizenship. The only right 
recognized in this at all is that they shall not lose the privilege of a 
Choctaw citizen; that is the only language, in this fourteenth article 
at least, that is a recognition of their i-ights in any manner that I 
can see. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Chairman, the word "citizen" was loosely 
used in the treaties. 

Mr. Carter. But you are getting away from the point. 

Mr. Ballinger. Technically speaking — and I want to answer 
your question fairly — technically speaking your are correct, but in 
construing the treaty of 1830 you should construe it in the light of 
the understanding of the contracting parties, and at that time none 
of the parties who remained there believed or were led to believe 
that they would lose their property rights if they did not remove. 

Mr. Carter. We can not say that, Mr. Ballinger. We do not know 
what was in their minds, and you can not base your claim on the be- 
lief of people who have been dead 35 or 40 years. We can not say 
this fellow believed so-and-so. As a matter of fact, I never saw a 
treaty made with Indians in my life that some Indian did not 
afterwards claim he did not understand, and I think our friend 
here, Mr. Wright, who has had varied experiences with Indians will 
bear that out. Is it not always the case, Mr. Wright, that same In- 
dian will claim, after a treaty is made, that he did not understand 
its terms? 

Mr. Wright. Yes. 

Mr. Ballixger. Mr. Carter, as to this particular treaty, it is freed 
from this doubt that ydu speak about, because of the fact that there 
is an accurate record of exactly what transpired and the representa- 
tions made, of which I have a copy. 

Mr. Carter. All right; now we are getting down to business. 
You say you have a record which says that at that time the people 
did not understand the treaty to mean what was afterwards shown? 
Let us have the record. 

Mr. Ballinger. I mean that at the time the treaty of 1830 was 
negotiated representation was made to the Indians that they did not 
have to remove, and there was no representation made to them then 
or later of which there is any record that by taking an allotment of 
land there they extinguished their right in the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Carter. This very treaty itself recognized their right to such 
in Mississippi? 

Mr. Ballinger. Certainly; to allotments out of the 10,000,000 
acres being ceded. They took their individual shares in land. 

Mr. Carter. There is no dispute al)out it? 

Mr. Ballinger. Certainly. 

Mr. Carter. iJndoubtedly the language of the treaty gives them 
the right to remain in Mississippi ? 

Mr. Ballinger. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. That is not the question at issue at all; but could 
they remain in Mississippi and still claim an interest in the estate in 
Indian Territory? Noav, I want to call your attention to the fact 
that this language here is not really a conclusive conferrence of the 
rights of citizenship. It says they shall not lose what? Citizenship? 



102 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

No; the privilege of a Clioctnw citizen; there might be a difference 
between actual citizenship and the privileges of citizenship. A man 
might have the privilege of becoming a citizen of the United States, 
although born in England, if he comes to America and becomes nat- 
ui'alized. 

Mr. Ballinger. Yes. 

Mr. Carter. In like manner it seems that the so-called Missis- 
sippi Choctaw reserved the privilege. The intent of this provision 
seems to be that the Mississippi ChoctaAv might have the privilege 
of becoming a Choctaw citizen. Hoav, if he removed? 

Mr. BALLI^'GER. Mr. Carter, right there let me answer your ques- 
tion. The object and purpose of that provision is, to my mind, sim- 
ply this and nothing more, that if the Choctaw Indian who re- 
mained in Mississippi wanted to go back and reaffiliate himself with 
the tribe, that he then could do so, and by doing so he became a citi- 
zen of the tribe in all the word implies. 

Mr. Carter. I think that is what is meant. 

Mr. Ballixger. That is precisely what is meant. 

Mr. Post. It was a mere privilege granted. 

Mr. Ballinger. Certainly; but suppose he did not go, there is 
no provision in the treaty by which he is to forfeit rights in prop- 
erty bought and paid for with his money. 

Mr. Carter. I am trying to confine the discussion to what rights 
were conferred by this, Mr. Ballinger. 

Mr. Ballinger. Yes. 

Mr. Carter, We are not discussing the question of whether this 
deprived him of any rights, but I am trying to find out what your 
contention is as to the claim the Mississippi Choctaw might have 
under this contention. His wdiole claim in the House and Senate 
has been asserted as resting on this provision. 

Mr. Gallinger. Mr. Carter, in my argument I tried to make my- 
self perfectly plain; that I attach no importance to that provision, 
article 14, because of the general language contained in articles 2 
and 3 of the treaty, which accorded practically the same rights to 
any person who remained. 

Mr. Hurley. Let me ask one question, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Bal- 
linger, will you state to the committee why 640 acres were given 
to those people? 

Mr. Ballikger. I will endeavor to make that perfectly plain. In 
1880, 640 acres of the land that was ceded was less than the indi- 
vidual share, if there had been a general allotment of the 10,000,000 
acres, each individual would have received. 

Mr. Post. In the 10,000,000 acres? 

Mr. Ballinger. In the ten or eleven million acres remaining. 
Xow, he got his share in land. Those w^ho did not take allotments 
got their share in money under the judgment of the Supreme Court, 
and that is why I have never been able to appreciate the importance 
of this Choctaw^ suit of the Chickasaw Nation against the United 
States in connection with this matter and the disposition of those 
funds, for in my opinion those funds should have properly gone to 
the Indians west, except the funds derived from the lands that 
should have been allotted to the Choctaw under the treaty of 1830, 
and which he did not get. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 103 

• Mr. Carter. Then it is agreed by you that this provision here or 
this last sentence in article 14 of the treaty of 1830 did not confer 
or attempt to confer citizenship upon any Mississippi Choctaw In- 
dian unless he removed to Oklahoma ? 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Carter, I have made myself perfectly plain 
on that, that in order to acquire political rights in the Choctaw 
Nation he must remove to the Choctaw Nation and reaffiliate himself 
with the tribe. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Chairman, I want to take exception to the 
construction which has been sought to be put upon this article, and 
you will find that by reading the article it does not make any pro- 
vision for acquiring citizenship in the Choctaw Nation at that or any 
other time. The provision is made in a treaty where certain persons 
who desire to remain in Mississippi are parties to the treaty, some 
are the chiefs who signed the treaty, and the supposition was not 
that they should gain citizenship or anything like that, but the pro- 
vision is as follows : " Persons who claim under this article shall not 
lose the privilege of a Choctaw citizen." Now, there is a great deal 
of importance which must be placed upon that word " lose," because 
they had at the time they signed that treaty the full privileges of 
Choctaw citizenship, and the question was not something that they 
might get in the future, but their status at that time and that status 
being preserved. 

Mr. Carter. Now, Mr. Richardson, is it your contention that they 
had the full right of citizenship at that time in Indian Territory? 

Mr. Richardson. In the Choctaw Nation? 

Mr. Carter. I mean the Choctaw Nation in Indian Territory? 

Mr. Richardson. My idea of that provision is this: That those 
Indians who were parties to that treaty, and who knew and desired 
to avail themselves of this article, regarded themselves as remaining 
in Mississippi, clothed with the full privileges of Choctaw citizen- 
ship, because the history of that article shows that those people who 
were intending to adopt the provisions of that article were the con- 
stant bidders; that is to say, they were the element who were so 
impressed with the traditions of the Choctaw Nation that this coun- 
try was the country which contained the graves of their ancestors, 
where their fathers had been born, and that they were the people who, 
of all Choctaws at that time, were Indians through and through, and 
they signed that treaty, as the contemporaneous records show, with 
the full belief that they did not lose any privilege of Choctaw 
citizens. 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Richardson, let me ask you this: Do not the 
records show that at that time the Federal Government was unable 
to start any migration to the western reservation? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes. 

Mr. Carter. They could not get any considerable number of the 
Choctaws to move, then? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes. 

Mr. Carter. Even after the treaty of 1820? 

Mr. Richardson. That is correct. 

Mr. Carter. And do you not claim that this provision was placed 
in the treaty in order to get the signatures of the Choctaws to the 
treaty of 1830? 



104 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. RiGiTARDsox. Absolutely so. These people would not have 
signed that agreement unless that was put in, and that was written 
after the treaty for that purpose. 

Mr. Carter. That was put in to satisfy the fellow who wanted to 
remain in Mississippi? 

Mr. Richardson. That is perfectly true. 

Mr. Carter. And it was put in to give him the privilege to remain 
in Mississippi if he wanted to? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes. 

Mr. Carter. And have his home there if he wanted to, but if he 
should become dissatisfied with his condition thereafter and desire to 
close out his holdings in Mississippi and go to Indian Territory, he 
could then reinstate himself, as his going there Avould reinstate him 
to full citizenshij) with the Choctaws in the West? 

Mr. Richardson, No; I do not think it would be necessary to 
reinstate him when the article says he shall not lose his privilege. 

That is the one word in this treaty which can not be overlooked, 
that he can not lose the privilege. 

Mr. Carter. Perhaps I do not make myself perfectly clear. If 
the fellow who took advantage of this fourteenth article should be- 
come dissatisfied with his lot in Mississippi on account of being im- 
posed on by the white man, or for any other reason, and decided to 
give up his land there, as might suit the dictates of his own bidding, 
he could then go to the tribal reservation in Indian Territory and 
have full citizenship — that is, he would not lose his citizenship. He 
could go there afterwards, any time, and retain his citizenship in 
that country. 

Mr. Richardson. Why, certainly; as any Choctaw citizen would 
be entitled to do so. 

Mr. Carter. Well, do you think, Mr. Richardson, that any man 
could become a citizen of any country and exercise the privileges of 
citizenship of that country, as privileges go, without living within 
the confines of that country? 

Mr. Richardson. I think so, provided that he were an original 
citizen of that country now. 

Mr. Carter. Well, now, let us follow that out just a moment. 
Suppose a man is a citizen of the United States and he moves to Ger- 
many — bad place for him to move right now, but suppose he does — 
can he in Germany exercise any of the privileges of a United States 
citizen? 

Mr. Richardson. He can have the privileges without exercising 
them. 

Mr. Carter. He can claim the protection of a United States citi- 
zen in Germany, but he can not exercise any such privileges as voting. 
He is not required to pay taxes to the United States Government 
while in that country, and he can not exercise the privilege of educat- 
ing his children in the United States unless he is absolutely in the 
United States. 

Mr. Richardson. No ; but he may be to the fullest extent a citizen 
of the United States, just as the subjects of Germany are bound, in 
their laws, to return to take service. 

Mr. Carter. I understand, but to exercise — and we must bear in 
mind that our rules are different — but to exercise citizenship — his 



ENKOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 105 

citizenship as a citizen of the United States — he must necessarily re- 
turn to the United States. 

Mr. Richardson. That would be true to exercise the privileges 
of citizenship. 

Mr. Carter. Would not participation in this be called the exercis- 
ing of citizenship? 

Mr. Richardson. I think that where the Choctaw estate is being 
wound up and distributed it would not be necessary for a man to 
return, provided he is a citizen of the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Carter. Wait a minute; how do you construe this word 
" remove " ? 

Mr. Richardson. I think the word " remove " undoubtedly means 
remove from Mississippi to the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Carter. Do you not think, as said by Judge Clayton, no word 
is put in any law except for a purpose, and it must be construed as 
having a meaning if it is in the law^ ? Do you not think this sentence 
here carries wdth it the implication that if he has the privilege of a 
Choctaw citizen he must remove to Indian Territory? 

Mr. Richardson. No ; I can not see that, Mr. Chairman. You must 
recall the fact that at that time the Choctaw Nation had no rules of 
citizenship further than that the property and property rights of the 
Choctaw Nation were such that they could be only actually physically 
enjoyed by those who were living on the land. 

Mr. Carter. On the reservation. 

Mr. Richardson. Therefore a person who lived in Mississippi, 
under article 14, although he might be in the terms of this article a 
person Avho had not lost his privilege of Choctaw citizenship, would 
not of necessity be enjoying the privileges of citizenship. 

Mr. Carter. Could not. 

Mr. Richardson. Could not, because he w^ould have to be physically 
present on the land in order to have any beneficial use of it. 

Mr. Carter. Must we not interpret that not in view of the condi- 
tions as now, but as then, because then such a thing as allotment of 
lands of the Choctaws was not considered. As a matter of fact the 
Choctaw people removed West so they might own their lands in com- 
mon and enjoy them in common, and might, as has been said in the 
past, have a Chinese wall built around them, from which the white 
man might be excluded. 

Mr. Richardson. I think that is perfectly true, but when you at- 
tempt under changed conditions — attempt to w'ind up and distribute 
the property of the Choctaw Nation, and these people are living 
there who the treaty says have not lost their privileges of citizenship, 
and w^hen they merely fulfill the contingency of going onto the land 
they are supposed to enjoy, are subjects to receive the benefits of 
citizenship except the annuities, under the treaty, then you must take 
them into account. 

Mr. Carter. You must take them into account, Mr. Richardson, 
it is true; but I do not see how you escape the interpretation of this 
word " remove." Now, let us read it again: 

Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw 
citizen who, if they have removed, are not to be entitled to any portion of the 
Choctaw land. 



106 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

The implication there seems perfectly plain to me that the estab- 
lishment or the retention of citizenship was contingent upon removal. 
If not so, Avhy should the word " remove " be put in there ? 

Mr. RiciiAitDSON. It was put in there, in my judgment, for this 
reason: The Mississippi Choctaw got 640 acres as the head of a 
family, or 320 or 120 as a minor, and that land meant something to 
them. At the same time, under that treaty, the only thing that was 
giAen the Choctaw Nation herself was the annuity of $400,000. Now, 
in the case of the Choctaw Nation v. United States will be found 
a statement made by Peter P. Beecher. who was then governor of the 
Choctaw Nation and a delegate to Washington, and he has figured 
out in that statement that if each person — head of a family and child 
in the Choctaw Nation in 1830 had been given the amounts under 
that treaty, it would have satisfied the 11,000 acres of land; that is 
to say. the amounts given the Choctaws who remained were their dis- 
tributive share of the 11,000 acres of land which the Choctaws would 
own then in Mississippi. 

Mr. Carter. Eleven million dollars. 

Mr. Richardson. And that was one of the arguments made in the 
case of the Choctaw Nation v. United States. Now, for that rea- 
son they got everything that they were entitled to under the treaty 
of 1830. The other Choctaws got an annuity which was supposed 
to be the only explanation for it, that it was compensation for the 
lands not taken up, although it was vastly inadequate. Now, I say, 
therefore, that when the Choctaw Indians removed it would have 
been unfair to let them live in Mississippi for five years and acquire 
title to their territory in Mississippi, sell it. and go over to the nation 
and receive the annuities which the Choctaws who had moved were 
getting. 

Mr. Carter. The annuities were inconsequential, were they not? 
Mr. Richardson. Practically so; they were $400,000 for lands 
which were worth five or six million dollars. 

Mr. CARn:R. Let me ask this: It is agreed by everybody, I think, 
that the thing the Federal Government wanted done at that time 
was to have these Indians move to Indian Territory; I think that is 
agreed. 

Mr. Richardson. That is absolutely agreed upon. 
Mr. Carter. That was one of the objects of making this treaty. 
Mr. Ballinger. That was 1830? 

Mr. Carter. 1830. Now, then, if you give to the Indian iii Okla- 
homa a reservation and then to the Mississippi Choctaw Indian the 
allotment in Mississippi and an equal interest in a reservation in the 
West, you offer a premium to the Indian to stay in Mississippi. 
Does that seem to bear out the policy of the Government at that 
time? 

Mr. Richardson. I think that the question of the policy of the 
Government at that time was subordinated to this fact, that the 
Government could not force the Choctaw Nation or its representa- 
tives to sign that treaty unless they did put that provision in it, and 
the records show that'^that provision was put in there, in my judg- 
ment, bv the oflEicers of the United States Avith the deliberate inten- 
tion at the time it was put there of violating it, and the records show 
that they followed that up with conduct which was in every respect a 
violation of the letter of the treaty. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 107 

Mr. Carter. Now, let me pursue that a little further. Would it 
not be natural to suppose that this was the intention of the Govern^ 
ment, that some of these Indians would perhaps allot these lands in 
Mississippi, but that afterwards the Government might be able to 
persaude them to abandon the allotments and go to the reservation 
in Indian Territory? Would that not be a very natural conclusion? 

Mr. Richardson. I suppose that Avould be; I do not see any reason 
for thinking that that would not be possibly the thing they had in 
view. 

Mr. Carter. It evidently would not have been the purpose of the 
Government, with its avowed policy of removal, to have offered a 
premium to a man to remain in Mississippi. They evidently would 
not have offered to give a man who remained in Mississippi more 
than the man who went to Indian Territory. 

Mr. Richardson. I think that is what they did. . *; 

Mr. Ballinger. They gave the fellow who went 

Mr. Richardson. The man who stayed in Mississippi under the 
fourteenth article and then moved to Oklahoma more than the 
fellow who moved in the first instance. Everybody's construction 
of the treaty agrees to that, because it is admitted that those per- 
sons living here under the fourteenth article stayed in Mississippi, 
the majorit}^ of them for a period of 12 to 15 years after 1830 — dur- 
ing all that time the Government was moving them — that they gave 
those people who moved, who got scrip, a cash indemnity for that 
scrip, and, I think, moved them into Oklahoma, and the Choctaw 
Nation west, and there they have been given, as my friend has said, 
full acknowledgment as Choctaw citizens, so a man who took ad- 
vantage of this article, whether he moved in 1840, or whether he is 
there to-day, is entitled to more advantages than those who moved. 

Mr. Carter. Well, then this is about the situation: The Federal 
Government, finding itself unable to get the Choctaws to migrate, 
offered in this fourteenth article provisions that these who remained 
in Mississippi might allot certain lands, that they might not lose the 
privilege of citizenship in the western reservation. So that gets 
backs to the original proposition that the intention, evidently, of the 
Federal Government at that time v>'as that the Indian who remained 
in Mississippi and took the allotment should not be entitled to 
citizenship in the ChoctaAv Nation in Oklahoma and Indian Ter- 
ritory unless he removed there and established his residence there, 
and for that reason, and in carrying out that intention, the 
words " if they remove " must have been placed in the fourteenth 
article. That seems perfectly plain to me. I can not see why these 
words, " if they ever remove." should have been placed in there un- 
less it was the intention of the Government that with the Choctaw 
Indian, the same as had always been true of other Indians, it would 
be necessary for him to remove on the reservaticm before he acquired 
actual rights. 

Mr. Richardson. If that last clause had not been put in that article 
the provision " if they ever remoAC," or was to be entitled to any 
portion of the Choctaw annuity, then the persons who removed in 
1888, 1840, or 1842 would have not removed and received a propor- 
tional share of the Choctaw annuity. 

Mr. Carter. As a matter of fact, I think they had. 

Mr. Richardson. I think that is true. 



108 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Mr. Caktek. I think the Mississippi Choctaw has always been 
treated, with reference to annuities, the same as other Choctaws. 

Mr. KiCHARDsoN. x\t that time there Avas no roll kept. 

Mr. Cauter. I mean Avhen they went to Indian Territory. I have 
never heard of any distinction between the citizenship of the Missis- 
sippi Choctaw and the native Choctaw after he was admitted to 
citizenship. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Chairman, would not the presumption, in 
view of the fact that the United States Avas endeavoring to moA^e 
these Indians and make them move — would not the statement in that 
provision that if tliose Avho claimed may retain the privileges of 
ChoctaAv citizenship, but if they removed are not to be given a part 
of the annuity mean to impose on those who stayed, under that article, 
a penalty of a loss of a part of their property or citizenship; that is, 
their right to share in the annuity? 

Mr. Carter. That would be true, perhaps; that conclusion might 
be draAvn, I would say, if the annuities really amountetd to anything, 
but $14,000 annuity for twenty or thirty thousand people is an incon- 
sequential amount. 

Mr. Richardson. There are $20,000 a year. 

Mr. Carter. Then, $20,000 for twenty or thirty thousand people 
would be an inconsequential matter. That would not have induced 
them to move to Oklahoma when the journey would have cost them a 
great deal more. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Chairman, I would like to call your attention 
to this fact, and I do not think it has been brought out, that if the 
11,000,000 acres remaining in Mississippi had been allotted in allot- 
ments of G40 acres, it Avould have allotted 18,750 Indians, and in 
1830 there were only 19,250 ChoctaAvs, including those Avho removed. 
Only the heads of families received 610 acres, children over 10 years 
of age 320 acres, and children under 10 years of age 140 acres; so 
that the Indian Avho took an allotment did not get his share of the 
11,000,000 acres disposed of by the treaty of 1830. 

Mr. Carter. You must take into consideration, Mr. Ballinger, that 
they had the pick of the lands. 

Mr. Ballinger. They had to take lands upon which their improve- 
ments were. 

Mr. Carter. If the conditions are similar in Mississippi to Okla- 
homa, you would have found the Indians allotted on all the best 
lands. 

Mr. Harrison. Mr. Chairman, I want to ask a question for infor- 
ination. I hear a great deal said about each one receiving 040 acres 
of land; that is, the head of the family, and those over 10 and under 
10 so much; noAv, I have it in mind from Avhat little attention I haA-e 
given it, that that applies to the chief men of the tribes. 

Mr. Carter. To anybody. 

Mr. Harrison. Did each Choctaw who removed in Mississippi ha\'e 
Bet apart to him and did he receive that 640 acres? 

Mr, Carter. He did not have set apart for him. 

Mr. Harrison. Has he ever gotten it ? 

Mr. Carter. He Avas allowed the privilege of taking 640 acres of 
land. 

Mr. Harrison. I see that. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 109 

Mr. Carter. If he did certain things; you contend he was pre- 
vented from doing those things by the Federal agents themselves. 

Mr. Harrison. That was the point I was after exactly; then he 
never got that land. 

J\Ir. Carter. One hundred and forty-three heads of families did. 

Mr. Harrison. Then those who did not get the land afterwards, 
upon appeal to the Federal Government, were given scrip — one-half 
in actual scrip and the other half in money. I may ask was that 
scrip paid to those who remained in Mississippi ? 

Mr. Carter. The first half was paid the scrip; the cash was paid 
in Indian Territory. 

Mr. Ballinger. Now, Mr. Chairman, right in that connection, I 
think the record pretty conclusively shows that those persons who 
were entitled to land under the treaty of 1830, as a matter of factj 
received no greater proportion of benefit from the lands, the value 
being paid for them in scrip and in various ways, than the Indian 
who removed from Mississippi received from the sale of the residue 
lands. Both received practically nothing. 

Mr. Carter. The one who moved to Mississippi? 

Mr. BALLI^GER. To Oklahoma; both received practically nothing. 
The Indian who removed to Oklahoma realized from his share of 
upward of 11,000,000 acres of land a share in about $2,200,000. The 
Indian who was entitled to an allotment of 640 acres probably did 
not receive over 10 per cent of its actual value. 

Mr. Carter. I take it this was what the actual facts were: Scrip 
was delivered to these people without any restrictions whatever — 
and if I am not right, I hope you gentlemen will correct me. That 
being the case, the Indians not being accustomed to trading for 
anything of value, the scrip naturally passed into the hands of some 
white men in Mississippi, for perhaps a very nominal price, a short 
time after he received it. Those who received the last half of the 
scrip, which v'as delivered in cash, having been delivered in Okla- 
homa, perhaps a great many squandered that, maybe in Oklahoma, 
perhaps took it back to Mississippi with them and squandered it, so 
that whatever they received from the Government in compensation 
for the treaty rights in 1830 was practically no benefit to them 
at all. So, in like manner, if $2,080, or any other amount, were de- 
livered to them as provided by the Harrison bill, these unfortunate 
people would realize practically no benefits from it, for it would 
(}uickly pass into the hands of scheming Avhite neighbors. 

Mr. KiciiARDSox, Mr. Chairman, I want to refer to a rumor in 
connection with something you just said in your statement. The 
Tccords of the agents who distributed that one-half of the scrip in 
Mississippi show that they recognized contracts which these Indians 
had entered into with attorneys, and those contracts called for one- 
half of what the Indians recovered; and the record shows that one- 
half of the scrip delivered in Mississippi was delivered to the attor- 
neys and not to the Indians. They never had physical possession of 
the scrip. 

Mr. Carter. They recognized powers of attoi-ney. 

Mr. RiciTAunsoN. They recognized ]>owers of attorney, and de- 
livered one-half of whut was indorsed, and transferred by virtue 
of power of attorney in the case. 



110 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Mr. Carter. Do you attribute the responsibility for that condition 
to the United States? Do you charge the United States or the 
Choctaw Nation Avith responsibility? 

Mr. Post. Evidently it would be the United States. 

Mr. Carter. Mr. lijchardson, you have read the Harrison bill 
carefully ? 

Mr. Richardson. I have. 

Mr. Carter. Is there anything in that bill to prevent the same 
thing occurring as occurred before ? 

Mr. Richardson. I do not think the Harrison bill has any pro- 
vision for the restriction of the use of the fund or property which 
niay be given these Indians. 

Mr. Carter. There is nothing in the bill to prevent it being paid 
Upon powers of attorney. 

Mr. Richardson. Well, the general law at this time provides that 
no attorney, in the collection of a Government claim from any citizen 
of the United States, can collect that money at the present time under 
the law as it exists now. If I represent you in the prosecution of a 
Government claim, I could not collect that money under power of 
attorney. 

Mr. Carit:r. I would have to collect it in person? 

Mr. Richardson. You would have to collect it in person, or you 
would have to indorse the draft, the only exception being that after 
the draft is drawn you could file a power of attorney after that day 
to indorse. 

Mr. Carter. You can authorize an attorney to indorse after that 
time ? 

Mr. Richardson. After that time. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Chairman, there was some question as to 
under what treaty the title was acquired. I want to read into the 
record an extract from the record in the case of 

Mr. Carter. I do not think there is any dispute about that. You 
can put it in the record, however. 

Mr. Bali.inger. If there is no dispute that the title to these lands 
Was intended in 1820 

Mr. Carter. That seems to be the understanding. 

Mr. Ballinger. I wanted to make it perfectly clear what the court 
held. 

Mr. Carter. That is your understanding, is it not? 

Mr. Ballinger. Yes; I do not know any one who disputes that. 

Mr. Carter. Is it yours, Mr. Bond ? 

Mr. Bond. No, sir; the complete title passed on the issuance and 
delivery of patent. 

Mr. Carter. Is it your understanding that the statement he has 
just made, to the effect that the treatv of 1820 carried the considera- 
tion? 

]\Tr. Bond. Yes; that is my understanding. 

Mr. Ballinger. And that that was the only consideration that ever 
passed for it? 

Mr. Bond. No; I do not concede that. Other considerations were 
involved before the execution and delivery of patent. 

Mr. Carter. Then put it in the record. 

Mr. Richardson. I just want to make this statement, Mr. Chair- 
man: You spoke of the Harrison bill. Of course he prepared this 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TKIBES. Ill 

bill, and the only provision for the full bloods in that bill is the 

mandatory chiusc written in there after these hearings started, pro- 
viding for the enrollment of the full bloods. 

Mr. Carter. After identification. 

Mr, Richardson. Yes; but in the bill which the counsel for the 
Mississippi full-blood Chcctaws prepared, and which is before this 
committee, a very complete system is provided for the establishment 
of a trust fund administered by the Secretary of the Interior, with 
a provision exempting their share in these funds from any debts and 
claims, and for the purchase of forms which are to be subject to 
restrictions, and I think very complete provision for the protection 
of these Indians. 

Mr. Ballinger. Now, I want to insert this extract from the deci- 
sion of the Supreme Court of the United States in Choctaw Nation v. 
United States (119 U. S., p. 38), wherein the court said: 

The most noticeable thing, upon a careful consideration of the terms of this 
treaty, is that no money consideration Is promised or iiaid for a cession of lands, 
the beneficial ownership of which is assumed to reside in the Choctaw Nation, 
and computed to amount to over 10,000,000 acres. It was not an exchange of 
lands east of the Mississippi River for lands west of that river. The latter 
tract had already been secured to them by its cession under the treaty of 1820. 

Mr. Bond. I agree to that, Mr. Chairman, as between the nation 
and the United States, but not as to the individuals ; the individuals 
who remained received an additional consideration before the deliv- 
ery and execution of the patent; they accepted the consideration of 
alloting land in Mississippi and relinquished the right to the lands 
west unles they removed and lived thereon. Title can pass by treaty 
and otherwise, but the patent in this case was the final evidence as 
to consideration, limitations, and restrictions, so far as the claimants 
are concerned. 

Mr, Post. I understand your claim, Mr. Ballinger, that you have 
an equity under the treaty of 1820. 

Mr, Ballinger. That is precisely my contention. 

Mr. Post. And that is your contention? 

Mr. Richardson. Well. I think that is one of the reasons why, 
under Article 14, the privileges of citizenship were not to be lost, 
because that was the only thing that the Choctaw Nation oAvned ex- 
cept its annuity. 

Subcommittee of Committee on Indian Affairs, 

House of Representatives, 
Wednesday^ August 12^ 191. 'i. 
The subcommittee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m., Hon. Charles D. 
Carter (chairman) presiding. 

Mr. Carter. Is Mr, Bond ready to proceed? 

Mr. Bond. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Hurley has asked for additional 
time; and while I am ready, I would rather have him complete his 
argument. 

Mr. Carter. How much time do you want, Mr. Hurley? 

Mr. Hurley. Fifteen or twenty minutes. 

Mr. Carter, How much time do you want, Mr, Bond? 

^Ir, Bond, An hour oi- an hour and a half. 

Mr. Carter, All right, Mr. Hurley; you can proceed. 



112 ENROLLMENT IX THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

STATEMENT OF MR. P. J. HUELEY— Continued. 

Mr. Hurley, Mr. Chairman, when the hearings were closed yester- 
day the question under discussion was whether or not the Choctaws 
residing in Mississippi have an interest in the hind purchased West 
in 1820 by reason of the fact that they had an interest in the land 
in Mississippi that was traded for the land in the West. I am not 
going into that question to any extent this morning, for the reason 
that I believe every member of the committee is fully convinced that 
when the fourteenth-article claimants took their share of the Choc- 
taw estate in 1830, and the payments that were made thereafter under 
the fourteenth article, they were individualized and given their dis- 
tributive share of the then tribal property of the Choctaw Nation. 
But another question was raised that I do not think I fully answered 
at the time it was under discussion, and that was the question in 
regard to the release that was made by the Choctaw Nation to the 
United States Government for all future claims arising under the 
fourteenth article, the United States Government requiring that the 
Choctaw Nation, upon the receipt of the $872,000 by the individual 
claimants, should execute a release to the United States, and that 
release was executed in conformity with the provisions of the act of 
Congress approved August 23, 1842, and is as follows: 

Whereas by an act of Congress entitled "An act to supply deficiencies in the 
appropriations for the service of the fiscal year ending the 30th day of June, 
1S52," all payments of interest in the amount awarded Choctaw claimants under 
the fourteenth article of the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek for lands on which 
they reside<l, but which it is imijossible to give them, shall cease, and that the 
Secretary of the Interior be directed to pay said claimants the amount of the 
principal awards in each case, respectively, and that an amount necessary for 
this purpose be appropriated not exceeding the sum of $872,000; and that final 
payment and satisfaction of said awards shall be first ratified and approved as 
a final release of all claims of such parties under the foui'teenth article of said 
treaty by the proper national authority of the Choctaws in such form as shall 
be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior : Now be it known that the 
said General Council of the Choctaw Nation do hereby ratify and approve the 
final payment and satisfaction of said awards agreebly to the provisions of the 
act aforesaid as a final release of the claims of such parties under the four- 
teenth article of said treaty. 

A. Nail, Speaker. 
November 6, 1852, passed in the senate. 
Approved : 

D. McCoy, President. 

George W. Harkins. 

George Folsom. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Hurley, let me ask you a question at this point. 
If the claims arising under that fourteenth article were individual 
claims, and if the allotment made at that time was an individualiza- 
tion of the tribal property, so far as those who remained East were 
concerned, how could the Choctaw Nation execute a release to those 
claimants? 

Mr. Hurley. That is the question that I was about to answer. 
That act was passed by the Choctaw Council to comply with the pro- 
viso contained in the act of July 21, 1852, whereby this money was 
appropriated. 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Hurley, let me ask you to consider this point : The 
Choctaw Nation might not have released, or might not have been able 
to release, to the Federal Government on accoimt of any claim that 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 113 

the Mississippi Choctaws' might have had against it, but might not 
the Choctaw Nation, by agreeing to such release, make itself respon- 
sible? In other words, granting that the nation might not relieve 
the responsibility of the Federal Government to the Mississippi Choc- 
taws, might it not by this action entail a responsibility upon itself? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. As I was saying, the proviso of the act of 
July 21, 1852, is as follows: 

That the final payment and satisfaction of said award shall be first ratified 
and approved as a final release of all claims of such parties under the four- 
teenth article of said treaty by the proper national authority of the Choctaws in 
such form as shall be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior. 

The only national or tribal government of the Choctaw Indians at 
that time was the government in the Choctaw Nation west of the 
Mississippi, and this government was the only government to 
enter into such an agreement with the United States. This action, 
therefore, was taken by the Choctaw authorities in pursuance of said 
act of Congress, and evidently in form as " prescribed by the Secre- 
tary of the Interior." 

It has heretofore been shown, however, that the money here appro- 
priated was not paid to the Choctaw Nation, but was paid to the indi- 
vidual fourteenth-article claimants under the act of 1842 by an offi- 
cer of the United States Government, Surely the Choctaw Nation 
can not be held accountable for this payment, since they had no hand 
in making it : nor was it possible for them to bind by this or any other 
agreement anyone but their own citizens. It would naturally be pre- 
sumed that the United States, whose authorities made the payment, 
would see that the Mississippi Choctaws, who were not subject to the 
jurisdiction of the Choctaw Nation, but were citizens of the United 
States and the State in which they resided, were protected in this 
payment. 

Even though the Choctaw Nation did by this act release the United 
States from the claims of the Mississippi Choctaw Indians under the 
fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830, this fact — which we do not 
admit — would not have any bearing upon the question under discus- 
sion. In determining this question let us see just what claims were 
covered by the pa3^ment of the $872,000 provided for by the act of 
July 21, 1852. It was to take up the claims of those persons whose 
rights had been favorably adjudicated by the act of August 23, 1842. 
The purpose of this latter act was to adjudicate the claims of Indians 
to reservations of land in Mississippi under the fourteenth and nine- 
teenth articles of the treaty of 1830. For some reason no nineteenth 
article claims were considered by the commission appointed under 
said act, and the only claims which were received and considered 
were those arising under the fourteenth article. This commission, as 
has heretofore been shown, received and favorably adjudicated the 
claims of over 4,000 persons to reservations in the States of Alabama, 
Mississippi, Louisiana, and Arkansas equal to half of the land to 
which claimants would have been entitled under the fourteenth 
article. The $872,000 was appropriated to reimburse the claimants 
for the second half of the scrip, which had never been issued. Thus, 
if the Choctaw Nation has asumed the liabilities of the United States 
in favor of the fourteenth-article claimants, it Avas only a guaranty 
to the United States that the claimants would receive the second half 



114 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TBIBES. 

of the payment of scrip in monev instead of land, and in no manner 
changed the relation of the Missisippi Choctaw Indians to the Choc- 
taw Nation in respect to the domain of the Choctaws in the West. 

This $872,000 was not paid out by the United States to the whole 
body of Choctaws, but was paid out to those individuals or their 
heirs or representatives who had received a favorable adjudication 
of their claims by the commission appointed under the act of 1842. 

But the Supreme Court of the United States has passed upon the 
validity of this release of the Choctaw Nation in the case of the Choc- 
taw Nation v. United States (119 U. S., 30), wherein it says: 

That act of Congress, it is true, declares that tlie final payment and satis- 
Taction of tlie sum tliereby appropriated and paid should, when ratified and 
approved by tlie proper national authority of the Choctaws, operate as a final 
release of all claims of those to whom such payments are made under the 
fourteenth article of the treatj' of September 27, 1830. But whether that pay- 
ment was a just and fair extinguishment of those claims, according to the terms 
of that treaty, was one of the very questions in dispute. And it is not un- 
reasonable to contend, as it is contended on behalf of the Choctaw Nation, that 
the effect of that release should be considered in view of the circumstance under 
which it was executed and in reference to which the Court of Claims has 
found, in the sixteenth finding, that " the claimants under the fourteenth article, 
the said Choctaw heads of families and their children, were reduced to a help- 
less condition of want, which rendered it practically impossible for them to 
contend with the United States in their requirement that the said Choctaw 
heads of families should accept and receive the scrip provided to be issued to 
them in lieu of the reservations by the act of 1842; and the said scrip and the 
money paid to redeem the same were taken and accepted because they were 
powerless to enforce any demands against or impose any conditions upon the 
United States." 

Mr. Ballinger. Does not the fact that the Choctaw Nation exe- 
cuted the release for individual claimants indicate that there was a 
fiduciary relation between the claimants and the Choctaw Nation at 
that time? 

Mr. Hurley. I am not prepared to dispute the fact found by the 
Supreme Court of the United States upon that subject. The United 
States required that the persons receiving the scrip and the money 
in lieu of scrip should through the proper national authority execute 
a release. The Mississippi Choctaws did receive that money in lieu 
of scrip and they did receive the scrip, and the Choctaw Nation was 
forced, as the Supreme Court afterwards held, to execute the release 
for those persons. It has been shown heretofore that those persons were 
required to remove to the Choctaw Nation before receiving the money 
in lieu of scrip, and the decision of the Supreme Court answers com- 
pletely the question that you now raise. The Choctaw Nation was 
not responsible for the payment of one dollar to any fourteenth 
article claimant. That was paid by the United States under the laws 
enacted by Congress and by the agent appointed by the United 
States. The Choctaw Nation had no hand in it, but they were forced 
by reason of their powerless condition and by reason of the depend- 
ency and poverty of the Mississippi Choctaws to execute that release 
in order to obtain for the Mississippi Choctaws that which the 
United States had promised to ^ve them, and the release, the Su- 
preme Court has held, had no bmding force. Your argument will 
not prevail to any great extent in an effort to reverse the decision of 
the Supreme Court upon that subject. 

Mr. Ballinger. I fail to find that portion of the Supreme Court 
decision wherein it held that the release was null and void and of no 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 115 

force and effect. On the other hand, the court seemed to hold that 
it was a valid release, and if that be true, then 

Mr. Hurley (interposing). You must get some true premise to 
start on before making that argument, i ou can not say, " If that 
be true," and use that as the basis for your argument. I have read 
into the record that portion of the Supreme Court decision which 
held that the release was not legal and that it was without effect. If 
you have anything by which you can show that the Supreme Court 
held otherwise than that, you could use that as a premise for your 
argument, but you can not say, " If the Supreme Court had held so 
and so, and, if that be true, then so and so would follow." The fact 
is that the Supreme Court held that that release was a nullity, and 
that it was obtained in a manner under duress, and that it had no 
force or effect. 

Mr. Post. Mr. Hurley, if I understand this general contention, it 
is somewhat like this : There was no consideration for the 10,000,000 
acres of land that were ceded by the Choctaw Nation to the United 
States Government in 1830 ; that the lands that were allotted under 
the fourteenth article to the Mississippi Choctaws and the scrip that 
was delivered to them, together with the money paid to them, was 
simply to reimburse the Mississippi Choctaws for their interest in 
the 10,000,000 acres of land, but that they had under the treaty of 
1820 a sort of equity in the Oklahoma country which had been ceded 
to the Choctaw Nation in 1820. In other words, as members of the 
entire nation they had never received any compensation for the 
interest which they had in the 4,000,000 acres of land in Mississippi 
that was ceded under the treaty of 1820 for the Oklahoma country, 
and that upon that account they have an equity in the Oklahoma 
property which still subsists. 

Mr. Hurley. What question do you ask me in relation to that? 

Mr. Post. The reporter will read the question. 

(The reporter read the last question.) 

Mr. Hurley. The question raised is about the same question that 
was discussed at length yesterday; and our position on that propo- 
sition is this, that the Choctaws did acquire all the land that they 
ever owned west of the Mississippi River by reason of the exchange, 
in 1820, of approximately 4,000,000 acres in Mississippi for that 
land. It was the policy of the United States Government to remove 
the Indians to that land west of the Mississippi River. In 1830 only 
a few of them had removed to that land, and the United States sent 
a commission to treat with them again, and that commission sent to 
them represented to them that the United States had given them a 
splendid tract of land west of the Mississippi, that they had not 
removed to it, and that they were still remaining in Mississippi. 
The commission said, " Now, if you want to remain here, surrender 
your lands west of the river and we will not treat with you again," or 
words to that effect. Then they did treat with the United States 
again and did readjust the title to the lands in the West, and they 
agreed then that the tract of land west of the Mississippi was to 
belong to the Choctaws and their heirs so long as they existed as a 
nation and lived upon it. That provision regarding their existence 
as a nation and living upon it was also placed in the deed of con- 
veyance which was made in March, 1843. In the readjustment of 



116 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

the conditions of the title, both in Mississippi and in the West, by 
treaty between the Choctaw tribes and the United States, it was 
agreed that those Jands in the West should belong to the reunited 
nation and to their heirs so long as they existed as a nation and 
lived upon it. Those who did not want to be a part of the nation 
and who did not Avant to live upon it were allowed then to be indi- 
vidualized in Mississippi, and they were entitled to receive in ^lis- 
sissippi at that time land that Avas considered to be their proportion- 
ate share of all the land and property that the Choctaw Indians then 
held- either in Mississippi or in (Jklahoma. 

They received their distributive share of all propert}^ and accepted 
that as a relinquishment of every right they had to property, except 
the privilege of removing to the Indian Territory, and thereafter 
enjoying the communal benefits of the land in the West. 

Mr. Cartek. In v.hat treaty was that language contained, that the 
lands in the West should inure to them and their descendants so long 
as thev existed as a nation, the treaty of 1820 or the treaty of 1830? 

Mr."^ Hurley. The treaty of 1830. 

Mr. Carter. Was tliere any such condition in the treaty of 1820? 

Mr. Hurley. No, sir. The condition in the treaty of 1820 was that 
it should be for the Choctaw Indians who " lived by hunting and 
would not work." The W'hole policy of the United States, as I under- 
stand it, was to effectuate an individualization of the Choctaws in 
Mississippi and to break up their tribal relations, and any of those 
who were not satisfied to become individuals and to become citizens 
of the United States, subject to the jurisdiction of the laws of the 
State of Mississippi and of the United States, were allowed to go to 
the Indian Territory and there resn.me their tribal organization. 

Mr. Ballixger. Mr. Hurley, if you will permit me to ask one other 
question, the shares of land or allotnionts made to those w^ho remained 
under the fourteenth article of the treaty w^ere no greater than their 
proportionate share of the land ceded under that treatv. Is that cor- 
rect? 

Mr. Hurley. That is not correct. 

Mr. Post. I think what Mr. Ballinger has in mind is that, if you 
take the 10,000,000 acres and divide them by the members of the 
Choctaw^ Nation, it would simply amount to their moiety in the 
10,000,000 acres. 

Mr. Hurleys That presumption is incorrect for this reason, that 
there are lands among those 10.000,000 acres of lands, if you were to 
equalize the land according to its quality from the standpoint of fer- 
tility, it Avould probably take thousands of ncres of swamp or moun- 
tain land to equal one tract of 640 acres of agricultural land, and at 
the time that that was made 640 acres of this good land in Missis- 
sippi were considered more than the proportion of each Indian in the 
entire estate. The reports of those Avho examined the lands in the 
West told of the great tract of pine-hill country in the Choctaw- 
Nation, now known as the Kiamichi country, where you could not get 
a shovel of dirt on a thousand acres of land. How^ many acres of 
that quality of land would it take to equal in A'alue 640 acres of agri- 
cultural land? They then reported that on the extreme western part 
of the Choctaw estate there were a few cactus plants, some sage- 
brush, and many sand dunes, and they made it appear at that time 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 117 

that it was not a fit plnce to live. Since thut time, of course, the 
Indian Territory has developed into a great mineral State, its agri- 
cultural land has been proven to be the best in the Southwest, and 
it is there that the wheat field of the North and the cotton field of 
the South meet. It is really good agricultural land, but if the hilly 
country on the east and the sand dunes on the west were taken into 
consideration with the quality of the fertility of the land that these 
individuals were entitled to in Mississippi under the fourteenth 
article of the treaty of 1830, they really had an opportunity to get 
more than their distributive share of all the property that the Choc- 
taw Nation owned at that time. 

Mr. Post. The question of civilization would enter into that? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir; in Mississippi. The fact that they were 
offered citizenship in the State of Mississippi where they would 
have the benefit of the white schools and all other benefits of a civil- 
ized community was an inducement. Of course, Mississippi has 
entirely deprived them of those rights since then, and if we are to 
be convinced by the arguments of the attorneys who have appeared 
here and by the record in the Court of Claims in the Jack Amos case, 
w^e are convinced that the Mississippi Choctaw Indians who owned 
and had rights to this property have been reduced in the State of 
Mississippi almost to a state of peonage. They are not even allowed 
to exercise the right of franchise or to send their children to the 
public schools for white children. 

Mr. Post. You do not mean that by the laws of the State of Mis- 
sissippi they are not allowed those privileges ? 

Mr. Hurley. No, sir; I mean that the law does permit them, but, 
as a matter of fact — I am speaking now only from the statements 
made by the attorneys before this committee and as shown by the rec- 
ord in the Court of Claims — they are not allowed to exercise the 
privileges that the law accords them. 

Mr. Ballinger. Right in that connection, under the 14th article 
of the treaty of 1830 the Indian who elected to remain was required 
to take the land upon which he then had improvements. Is that 
correct ? 

Mr. Hurley. It should at least cover part of his improvements. 

Mr. Ballinger. That is correct; he had to take the land upon 
which he had improvements? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Ballinger. Those who remained were practically all full- 
bloods, w^ere they not? 

Mr. Hurley. Those who remained were supposed to be those who 
wanted to adopt civilized customs and live under white man's condi- 
tions. They were the most thrifty members of the tribe. They were 
not living in bands, Init had improvements of their OAvn; and if we 
are to ])e guided by what happened in our own coimtry — and I lived 
there long before the allotment in severalty — all the best land in the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations was improved and was claimed by 
the more thrifty citizens before there was ever an allotment made in 
severalty, and I have been told, and the records bear out the fact, 
that that same condition existed in Mississippi. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Hurley, will you answer the question, if you 
have any information with reference to it, Avhether or not those who 



118 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

remained, or the major portion of those who remained, were full 
bloods or mixed bloods? 

Mr. Carter. Let me ask a question right there: Were the major 
portion of the Choctaws mixed blood or full blood ? 

Mr. Hurley. That is what I was about to say. Up to that time 
the Choctaws had not become very much intermingled with the 
white race. As a matter of fact, intelligence among Indians is 
not always confined to the Indian of mixed blood. Some of the 
most astute Indians that I know to-day are full-blood Indians. 

Mr. Post. What was the character of the white people in 1830 
in the Mississippi Choctaw country? 

Mr. Hurley. Reall}^, I am not prepared to say what the character 
was. Not to condemn all the white people as a class, but generally 
the first adventurers who go on an Indian reservation and settle 
among the Indians are not a very enlightened class of people. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Hurley, you are aware of the fact that in 1829 
a treatv with the Choctaws was negotiated, are you not? 

Mr. Hurley. In 1829? 

Mr. Ballinger. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hurley. I am not aware of anv treatv being adopted after 
1820 and before 1830, except the treaty of 1825. 

Mr. Ballinger. Are you not aware of the fact that in 1829 a 
treaty was drafted with the Choctaws? 

Mr. Hurley. What relevancy has that to this case ? If it has any 
relevancy, why did you not bring it out in your own argument? 

Mr. Ballinger. It is directly relevant. 

Mr. Hurley. Why did you not put it in your argument ? 

Mr. Ballinger. In 1829 a treaty with the Choctaw Indians was 
drafted. 

Mr. Hurley. Was that treaty ever confirmed or ratified? 

Mr. Ballinger. That treaty was transmitted to Washington. 
Mushulatubbe, one of the most prominent Choctaw Indians, came to 
Washington and protested to his then personal friend, Gen. Jackson, 
who was President of the United States, asserting in a memorial 
presented that that treaty conferred upon the mixed bloods and the 
white people great benefits to the injury of the full-blood Indians, 
and Gen. Jackson transmitted that communication to the Senate, and 
the Senate refused to ratify the treaty, thus indicating that in 1829 
the white people and the mixed bloods dominated the Choctaw Na- 
tion, and had control at that time of the more valuable lands. I ask 
you if you do not know that as a historical fact in connection with 
this transaction? 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Chairman, there Mr. Ballinger begins again his 
same line of argument, thus indicating why something should be. 
He does not state it as a fact that any white man was a party to the 
treaty to which he refers; he does not show that any mixed-blood 
Indian was a party to the proposed treatv; but he is asking me to 
admit a conclusion that he draws without submitting the facts upon 
which to base his conclusion. On yesterday he raised the question 
that the interest of the Mississippi Choctaws in the estate was by 
reason of the conA^eyance made to the Government of 4,000 acres of 
land in 1820, and I submit to this committee that Mv. Ballinger never 
mentioned that until after it was raised by the questions of Mr. Post. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 119 

Mr. Ballinger. I will submit copies of the original documents to 
show that when that treaty came on here in 1829 there were two or 
three delegations of Choctaw Indians who came to Washington, one 
headed by the mixed bloods 

Mr. Hurley (interposing). Who were the mixed bloods? Name 
some mixed bloods. 

Mr. Balltnger. I will insert in the record the exact official records 
with reference to the transaction. Another delegation was headed 
by Chief Mushulatubbe, and another delegation was headed by some 
other Indian. That treaty was rejected, and I will submit a copy of 
the original treaty and of the protest. 

Mr. Hurley. What relevancy has it, if the treaty was not adopted? 

Mr. Balltnger. It indicates beyond any question that at that time 
the mixed bloods were in control of the Choctaw Nation and that the 
full bloods were being subordinated to an inferior position as to the 
property of the tribe. 

Mr. Hurley. Then you contend that on account of the inferior po- 
sition of the full bloods they were the very persons who received the 
benefits under the treaty of 1830 in Mississippi? 

Mr. Ballinger. My contention is that the full bloods who re- 
mained did not receive the best lands in Mississippi under the treaty 
of 1830. 

Mr. Carter. What is the use of you and Mr. Hurley taking up the 
time of this committee in trying to show something that is impossible 
of demonstration ? I suppose this argument grew out of the state- 
ment Mr. Hurley made to the effect that the best lands for agricul- 
tural purposes in Mississippi were the lands allotted and occupied by 
the Indians. Now, that is a natural conclusion, because any man who 
has any intelligence and who wants to make a living will very natu- 
rally go upon the land that will produce the most, and I do not see 
any chance in the world the converse of that proposition to be true. 

Mr. Richardson. I would like to ask a question in connection with 
this part of the discussion, which I think may be material. 

Mr. Cariter. Mr. Ballinger, while I think it is immaterial to the 
contention, if you have any records to show that the Indians who 
were given allotments or who had made improvements in Mississippi 
had or had not taken the best land, you can present those records; 
but let us not waste the time of the committee in argument about a 
point that is practically immaterial. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Hurley, in the sections knoAvn as the supple- 
mental articles to the treaty of 1830, and also in article 19 of the 
main treaty, provision was made that each Choctaw head of a family 
who had not exceeding 40 acres of land under cultivation during that 
preceding year, 1830, and those who had from 20 to 30 acres should 
receive certain quantities of land in Mississippi. 

Mr. HuitLEY. Please read the quantities so that we can give Mr. 
Ballinger an idea of how much land the people in Mississippi re- 
ceived. 

Mr. Richardson. The provision of article 19 is 

Mr. Hurley (interposing). I want it to be understood that this 
is not relevant to the issue at all, because the nhiotcenth and supple- 
mental articles claimants are not claimants here now, but I should 
like to have it so in the i-ecoixl to sliow that those Avho remained in 



120 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mississippi got much more than their distributive share of the prop- 
erty of the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Ballinger. I referred only to those who remained under the 
fourteenth article. 

Mr. EiciiARusoN. The heads of families who had land in cultiva- 
tion were to receive under the nineteenth article not exceeding 460 
acres — those who had 40 acres under cultivation; a half section of 
land to those who had from 20 to 30 acres; a quarter of a section to 
those w^ho had from 12 to 20 acres, and half of that quantity to those 
who had cultivated from 2 to 12 acres; and each captain w^as to re- 
ceive an additional quantity of land provided for. 

Mr. Hurley. How much? 

Mr. Richardson. The proAdsion was that a captain should receive 
not less than a section, and if he received under the preceding parts 
of article 19 less than a section, he was entitled to the half section 
adjoining his own reservation in addition. 

Mr. Hurley. Have you shown the amounts of land that they 
received? Of course that treaty is all in the record, and will show 
the amount of land given to the individuals who were specially men- 
tioned in the treaty. 

Mr. Richardson. The supplemental articles mention a large num- 
ber of people to whom certain quantities of land were given. 

Mr. Hurley. And the acreage is given in each instance? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hurley. Showing the number of acres which each person 
received ? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Do you understand that those persons who took land under the 
nineteenth article remained in Mississippi or moved w^est ? 

Mr. Hurley. Of course, a great number of them removed west. 
Some of the records in the Net Proceeds case show that those parties 
were claimants for stock, etc., that was lost by reason of their re- 
moval, but the fact that a great number of different classes of Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws emigrated from time to time shows that a great 
number of those claimants did remove west. 

Mr. Richardson. There was no condition attached to the nine- 
teenth article and supplemental grants requiring the citizens to re- 
side on the land ? 

Mr. Hurley. No, sir. 

Mr. Richardson. There was no provision for their remaining in 
Mississippi and acquiring citizenship in that State? 

Mr. Hurley. There was no provision that would allow them to 
remain in Mississippi and accept that land and reside there as aliens 
of the Choctaw Nation and thereafter to have the privilege of re- 
moving to the Choctaw Nation, as was reserved to the fourteenth- 
article clainuints. 

Mr. RiciLVRDsoN. I want to call your attention to the report of 
the DaAves Commission of March 10, 1899, which discusses the ques- 
tion of what persons remained in Mississippi under the fourteenth 
article of the treaty of 1830 and what persons remained under the 
nineteenth article. This report makes <^e following statement: 

Citizens of the tribe of mixed bloods, with some degree of education and more 
intelligence, secured provisions in other articles — 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 121 

Other than the fourteenth article — 

of said treaty and of the supplement thereto, by which they were si>ecially pro- 
vided for, leaving the body of the full-blood Choctaws to be provided for under 
the fourteenth article. 

Mr. Hurley. That means, of course, the body of the Choctaws 
who remained in Mississippi, because the body of the full bloods emi- 
grated to the Choctaw Nation west. 

Mr. Richardson. That is correct, I think, because it says " leav- 
ing the body of the full-blood Choctaws to be provided for under the 
fourteenth article." 

Mr. Hurley. Not only left, but actually were provided for under 
the fourteenth article. 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. Is that in accordance with your under- 
standing of the facts ? 

Mr. Hurley. That is what I have attempted to state to this 
committee. 

Mr. Richardson. You have criticized the adoption of what is 
known as the full-blood rule of evidence. If that statement in this 
report of March 10, 1899, which enunciated the full-blood rule of evi- 
dence be correct, do you not think that they were correct in their pre- 
sumption which they adduced as a rule of evidence to guide them that 
the full-blood Choctaws living in Mississippi in 1899 — being, of 
course, descendants of full-blood ancestors and each Choctaw who 
liA'ed there must have had approximately 8 to 16 ancestors in 1830 — 
that their presumption was a fair one that those full-blood Choctaws 
living there in 1899 were the descendants of fourteenth-article claim- 
ants and not nineteenth-article claimants? 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Richardson's argument, of 
course, is correct to a certain extent, but I do not want him to leave 
the impression with the committee that those captains and district 
chiefs and all supplemental article claimants were mixed-blood In- 
dians. It is true that a few of the nineteenth-article claimants were 
mixed bloods, American State Papers, vohime 7, sho-vs how few 
of them were really mixed bloods. There were a few intermarried 
white men claimants who claimed under the fourteenth article as 
heads of Choctaw families. The distinction was drawn that there 
is a vast difference between a Choctaw head of a family and the 
head of a Choctaw family. So, as a matter of fact, at that time there 
were only a very few mixed bloods among the Indians. While, as 
you say.by reason of the great number of fourteenth-article claim- 
ants wiio remained and the comparatively small number of claimants 
under the nineteenth article, of course there were a greater number 
of full bloods under the fourteenth article than under the nineteenth 
article and other articles, but there were many full bloods who were 
claimants under the other articles. Outside of that statement, I 
have shown by the records of the Indian Office that the fourteenth- 
article claimants have emigrated to the Indian Territory. The com- 
mission to which you refer there reported that there were very few, 
if any, Indians in Mississippi at that time who could prove their 
descent from the fourteenth-article claimants. 

Mr. Post. There are tAvo propositions before the committee which 
you have not touched on and which I want to call your attention to. 



122 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

The first one is under tlie provisions of article 14 of the treaty of 
1830, which is: 

Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privileges of a Choc- 
taw citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any portion of the 
Choctaw annuity. 

What limitation, if any, is there upon the right of removal? Was 
it to continue forever? The other proposition is. Do the rights con- 
ferred under article 14 attach to the Mississippi Choctaw then in 
being, or would they cover the descendants? 

Mr. HuELEY. In answer to your first proposition, about the length 
of time that this right should continue, the Choctaw people sought 
to foreclose the duration of that time in 1866, when they provided for 
an allotment of their lands in severalty by treaty with the United 
States. They provided for an advertisement to the absentee Choc- 
taws, including, of course, the Mississippi Choctaws, requiring them 
to come to the Choctaw Nation within a certain time and establish a 
residence there and to reside upon the land for a period of years 
before becoming entitled, and that all those who would not comply 
with that requirement should lose. Those who thereafter removed, 
of course, would be excluded, because thereafter the nation would 
not exist. Under that treaty, however, there was no allotment of 
land in severalty. In order to show what the duration of the right 
was supposed to be at that time I will place in the record at this 
point that provision of the treaty, as follows : 

The notice required in the above article shall be given not only in the Choc- 
taw and Chickasaw Nations but by publication in newspapers printed in the 
States of Mississippi and Tennnessee, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and Alabama, 
to the end that sucli Choctaws and Chickasaws as yet remain outside of the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations may be informed and have opportunity to 
exercise the rights hereby given to resident Choctaws and Chickasaws: Pro- 
vided, That before any such absent Choctaw or Chickasaw shall be permitted 
to select for liimself or herself or others, as hereinafter provided, he or she 
shall satisfy tiie register of the laud office of his or her intention, or the inten- 
tion of the party for whom selection is to be made, to become bona fide resi- 
dent in the s;ii(l nation within five years from the time of selection; and should 
the said absentee fail to remove into said nation and occupy and commence 
an imiu-ovement on the land selected within the time afaresaid the said selec- 
tion shall be canceled and the land shall thereafter be discharged from all claim 
on account thereof. 

That was under the treaty of 1866, when they proposed to cul- 
minate the tribal affairs. Those conditions ran along until 1893, 
when a commission was appointed to negotiate with the Indians of 
the Five Civilized Tribes to bring about such changes as might be 
necessary to prepare the country for statehood. They determined 
that the communal condition of the land must cease and that each 
Indian who was interested in the land should have his or her per 
capita share of the property. It was this that brought about the 
renewed effort of the United States Government to bring to the 
Indian Territory every one who had a right to that land. It is 
evident that they could not have the privileges of Choctaw citizens 
after the Choctaw Nation and Choctaw citizenship had expired. 
The privilege granted them under the treaty of 1830 was that they 
were not to lose the privilege of Choctaw citizens, but that if they 
ever removed to the Choctaw Nation, which was the only place on 
earth were they could enjoy it, because no one could individually 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 123 

own any property in the Choctaw Nation, they could there enjoy a 
communal interest in the land west. So when that condition ex- 
pired, when there was no longer any communal property, and when 
the allotments were held in severalty, there was not in existence the 
Choctaw Nation with which they could reaffiliate themselves and 
become a part of its citizenship. 

Mr. Post. There is some communal property still existing, is 
there not? 

Mr. Hurley. There is tribal property still existing, but the right 
to participate in that property has been foreclosed by the treaty 
between the United States Government and the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Nations, and so sacred has that treaty been considered by the 
Choctaws themselves, however not so by the United States, that there 
are in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations to-day not less than 
3,000 Indian children born in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
the children of those persons who are on the roll, they have resided 
upon the land, they are undoubtedly Indians by blood of those 
tribes, yet, under the provisions of this treaty, which foreclosed the 
right of the United States Government to enroll anyone else, these 
children are not permitted to participate in any of the property 
that is left in the Choctaw Nation. In the words of the treaty, "no 
person whose name does not appear upon the rolls as herein provided 
shall be entitled to in any manner participate in the distribution of 
the common property of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes." 

Mr. Ballinger. By treaty, do you mean the agreement of July 1, 
1902, which was an act of Congress ? 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Ballinger, it is only necessary 

Mr. Carter (interposing). There is no use in going into a discus- 
sion of that. That question will lead us irresistably into an inter- 
minable discussion of something that has already been fully discussed 
before the committee and already gone into this record. 

Mr. Ballinger. That may be, but there are other Congressmen be- 
sides the members of this committee who will probably read this 
record, and when they find constant references to that treaty they 
will naturally suppose that it was a treaty. 

The Chairman. It is in the record, and the explanation of a 
treaty, an agreement, and the power of Congress to repeal either or 
both has been put in the record three or four times. All of us are 
familiar with those things. There is no reason why we should be ex- 
pected to go over again and again and thrash out matters that have 
already been fully explained. If Mr. Hurley wants to put it in the 
record again, he may do so once more, but we want it understood that 
hereafter these things are not going into the record more than a 
dozen times. 

Mr. Hurley. It is only necessaiy for me to call attention to the 
provision which I formerly read in answer to Mr. Post's question. 
He asked me how the right of these people, oi', rather, the privilege 
of these people, to reaffiliate themselves with the Choctaw Nation 
was foreclosed, and I referred to the supplemental agreement of 1902 
as a treaty, and if T imderstand Avhat a treaty is, that is a treaty. It 
was proposed by the Choctaw and Chickasaw people and submitted 
to Congress. It was changed to some extent and resubmitted to the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw people, approved by their council, and 



124 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

adopted by a vote of the Choctaw and Chickasaw people. That is 
M'hat I reifer to as a treaty between the United States Government 
and the Choctaw Nation. 
\ Mr. Post. Without going into all that, I want to understand your 
I position, and I want to recite it here to see if I understand it right. 
If I understand you rightly, this privilege conferred upon the Mis- 
sissippi ChoctaAV to remove and not lose his right to become a citi- 
zen of the Choctaw Nation west was obliterated when the Choctaw 
Nation was dissolved? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Post. - That is the long and the short of it ? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Post. In other words, the land that was conveyed to them in 
1843 by the United States was conveyed to them so long as they ex- 
isted as a nation and resided upon that land ? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Post. And the effect of that deed has been set aside practically 
from the fact that the nation has been dissolved and the land has 
been individualized, and, therefore, when that fact occurred the 
right to remove terminated? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. That proposition was ably argued by the 
Hon. William H. Murray on the floor of the House, showing the 
time of the dissolution of the tribal government 

Mr. Post (interposing). Well, let us hear you on the other propo- 
sition. 

Mr. Hurley. In closing that one point, I want to show conclu- 
sively, because I think this is a good place to show it, who were to 
participate in this property after the closing of the rolls, "^^^^len the 
rolls were closed the tribal government no longer existed, and it was 
shorn of all powers as a government. There exists now a chief or 
governor who has authority to sign conveyances. There is now no 
vestage of governmental authority existing in the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations. The government was dissolved and the title to 
the undistributed property is now in the enrolled members of the 
tribes and was placed in them by section 35 of the agreement 
approved July 1, 1902, in the following language: 

No person whose name does not appear upon the rolls as herein provided 
t^hall be entitled to in any manner participate in the distribution of the common 
property of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes and those whose names appear 
thereon shall participate in the manner set forth in this agreement. 

Now, what is the manner set forth in this agreement? Article 14 
of that agreement provides: 

When allotments as herein provided have been made to all citizens and 
freednien the resi<lue of lamls not herein reserved, or otherwise disposed of, if any 
there be, shall be sold at public auction under rules and regulations and on 
terms to be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior, and so niucli of the 
proceeds as may be necessary for equalizing allotments shall be used for that 
purpose and the balance shall be paid into the Treasury of the United States 
to the credit of the Choctaws and Chickasaws and distributed per capita as 
other funds of the tribes. 

Now, Mr. Post, those rolls have been completed and approved in 
conformity with the provisions of this agreement. The title to the 
undistributed estate is undoubtedly in the persons whose names ap-' 
pear on those rolls, and for more than 10 3'ears have been entitled 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 125 

to a distribution of the proceeds from the sale of the residue of their 
tribal property. 

Mr. Post. A good deal of the land doAA'n there has not been dis- 
posed of? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Post, In the Choctaw Nation? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir; there are approximately 446,000 acres of 
segregated coal land. 

Mr. Post. We have been over that. I am calling attention to that 
fact in order that I may ask you this question : Under the deed made 
by the United States GoATrnment in 1843 it was provided that this 
land should belong to the Choctaw Nation so long as they existed as 
a Choctaw Nation and resided upon the land. 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Post. Where is the fee to that land now ? 

Mr. Hurley. A base or determinable fee title rests in the enrolled 
members of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations under the provisions 
of the act of June 28. 1898, commonly known as the Atoka agreement, 
and the act of 1902, commonly known as the supplemental agreement. 
So that the title, so far as the residue is concerned, is now in the 
individuals whose names appear upon the officially approved rolls 
of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, and the United States Gov- 
ernment is bound by solemn treaty obligations to sell that residue 
and distribute the proceeds arishig therefrom per capita among those 
people whose names are now upon the rolls. 

Mr. Post. Suppose the title to this remainder was yet in the Choc- \ 
taw Nation under the terms of that deed; would that cut off the 
right of the fourteenth-article claimants to claim citizenship still? ^ 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir; I believe that right of the fourteenth-article 
claimants could be foreclosed at any time upon reasonable notice. 
They had 77 years in which to remove before there was any action 
taken looking to the final disposition of the tribal property and the 
allotment in severalty. After beginning the making of these rolls, 
they had 11 years, and every inducement and every opportunity was 
offered them to come when they could have gotten land, but now 
the time has come when they can not get land, and when the only 
thing they can get is a part of the money, and the proponents of this 
bill argue that we ought not even to require them to come to the 
nation to share in our property, but that we ought to send some 
money to them in Mississippi. Now, I do not want to be harsh on 
those who want us to send money to the Indians in Mississippi, but 
if we are to judge the future by the past, those friends of the Indian 
in Mississippi who have deprived him of everything he has and who . 
have even taken away his spirit of self-reliance, are not going to let 
the Indians there get much of any money that is sent him. Besides, 
the Mississippi Choctaw are not equitably, legally, or morally entitled 
to any part of the Choctaw-Chickasaw funds. 

Mr. Richardson. There is just one thing I want to ask you before 
you leave that subject: The Mississippi Choctaws were not parties to 
either the Atoka agreement of 1898 or the supplemental agreement 

of 1902 

Mr, Huri^ey (interposing). Necessarily they were not parties to 
that, because they had been individualized and had received their 
distributive share of the tribal property. They were not citizens 



126 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

of the Choctaw Nation; they were aliens to the Choctaw Nation 
and citizens of Mississippi. They had only the privilege to remove 
to the Choctaw Nation and of thereafter to become citizens, if they 
were fourteenth-article claimants — but I think I have shown con- 
clusively that there is no such thing as a fourteenth-article claimant 
now in Mississippi. 

Mr. Richardson. Do you admit that they had a right, whether 
it was the right of full citizenship or the right of becoming citi- 
zens — do you admit that at that time they had a right— — - 

Mr. Hurley (interposing). You asked me if they were parties, 
and I said they had no right to be parties to the treaty, because if 
they had had that right they Avould have been parties to it. They 
were not citizens of the Choctaw Nation; they were aliens to the 
Choctaw Nation and citizens of another jurisdiction. They had 
no right to citizenship in the Choctaw Nation, but merely the 
privilege of removing to the Choctaw Nation and thereafter acquir- 
ing citizenship. They had no right to be parties to the treaty. 

Mr. Richardson. But whatever right they had — and I do not 
mean the right to become parties to the treaty — but whatever right 
they had to acquire citizenship and an estate in Oklahoma was cut 
off by agreements made to which they were not parties. Now, I 
want to ask you this: Whether, in your judgment, their rights have 
been fully foreclosed, unless the provisions made for enabling them 
to exercise their right of acquiring citizenship were fair to them? 

Mr. Hurley. Their rights have been fully foreclosed, if the giv- 
ing to every claimant his distributive share of the property is a fore- 
closure of his right to the balance of that property; their right to 
participate in any monej'^ as citizens of the Choctaw Nation is fore- 
closed, if the fact that a man is an alien to the nation, a nonresi- 
dent and not a citizen of the nation, can constitute a foreclosure; 
their rights have been foreclosed, if the decision of the commission 
appointed by Congress to determine their rights is binding upon 
them; their rights have been foreclosed, if the decisions of the 
United States courts determining their rights have any virtue what- 
ever; their rights have been foreclosed, if there is any reliance to be 
placed in the solemn treaty promises made by the Government of 
the United States to the Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians; their 
rights have been foreclosed, if any consideration must be given to 
the act of April 26, 1906, by which those rolls were closed; their 
rights have been foreclosed, if after thorough and fair considera- 
tion of every argument that you and the many other able attorneys 
have advanced in their behalf has been considered on more than 
four different occasions — if, as I say, after a consideration of the 
evidence and of those arguments by commissions, by courts, and by 
Congress they have not been found to be entitled to the rights of 
citizenship, I think that in the mind of any fair man that that would 
indicate that they have no such rights. If all this is not a deter- 
mination of their rights, then it is futile to stand here and argue the 
questions that have been presented to this committee. 

Mr. Richardson. You contended that their rights were foreclosed 
by the treaty of 1866 

Mr. Hurley. If you do not understand from what I have said 
about the different treaties, laws, and judgments by which the 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 127 

claims — not the rights; they had no claim as a matter of right — of 
these people have been foreclosed, it would be impossible for me to 
explain it to you, and I will ask the stenographer to read what I 
have stated. 

Mr. Richardson. I imderstand what you have said about it. You 
answered the question by saying their rights had been foreclosed, and 
you have referred to a series of enactments, beginning with 1866 and 
extending down to 1906, covering a period of 40 years, but you have 
not stated by which ones of those enactments their riglits were fore- 
closed. 

Mr. Hurley. I will say that they were foreclosed by any one or 
all of them. 

Mr. Richardson. Now, the first one you referred to was the treaty 
of 1866, and I want to ask you if any division was ever made under 
that treaty. 

Mr. Hurley. I stated that no allotment was made under that 
treaty; consequently that was never operative and was never used 
by the Choctaw Nation as a bar against these people. I used that 
in answer to Mr. Post's question as to what acts, if any, had been 
taken to foreclose their right, and to what extent, to what number of 
years, and to what degree of descent that privilege extended. It was 
a privilege, not a right. They never had an enforceable right; they 
had the privilege to remove to the Choctaw Nation and to thereafter 
become citizens. He asked me where did that privilege end, and 
how it had been foreclosed. They had no right to foreclose, all they 
had was a privilege. 

Mr. Richardson. That provision was of the same solenm character 
as these other treaty obligations 

Mr. Post (interposing). If I understand it right, he said that 
wiien the Choctaw Nation west was dissolved as a nation their rights 
terminated. 

Mr. Richardson. The question that I want to get at is this, 
whether by the foreclosure of that privilege of becoming citizens, 
carrying with it the deprivation of those persons of the treaty right 
to acquire an interest in the Choctaw estate, which, as your theory is, 
they gave up temporarily Avhen they remained in Mississippi — 
whether you can deprive those people of that right and privilege by 
agreements made to which they were not parties and w^ithout giving 
them a reasonable opportunity to come in and set up their claims. 

Mr. Post. You think that it must have been contemplated at that 
time — that is, when the agreement was made — that at some time in 
the future the Choctaw Nation would be dissolved. 

Mr. Richardson. The treaty conferred the right 

Mr. Post (interposing). But it continues only so long as they exist 
as a nation and so long as they reside upon this land. That was a 
limitation, because the Indians as well as the United States must 
have conceived that at some date in the future that nation would be 
absorbed by the United States. 

Mr. Hurley. I want to consider the vested rights that Mr. Rich- 
ardson has been talking about. 

Mr. Post. I do not think you need discuss that. No Indian had 
a vested right. 

Mr. Hurley. They have no vested right whatever. 



128 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Mr. Carter. I think Mr. Richardson conceded that in his argu- 
ment before the committee. 

Mr. Richardson. I said that. 

Mr. Post. I would like to hear you on your second proposition. 

Mr. Hurley. As to the second proposition, as to whether or not the 
right reserved under the fourteenth article was extended to the heirs 
of the pers< ris then living, I am of the opinion that a strict construc- 
tion of that clause would be to the effect that that is an individual or 
personal riL'iit, and that no one had reserved to him under that ar- 
ticle the privilege of going to the Choctaw Nation and becoming a 
citizen except the 4,161 persons then living and who are named in 
the list that I have submitted. All of those people are long since 
dead. There is one reason why I have not dwelt upon that nor con- 
tended for it, and that is this, it is a technical ground, but it is one 
wdiich I believe, according to a strict construction, would have ex- 
cluded every descendant of every fourteenth- article claimant. But 
the Choctaw Nation has not been technical with these people; the 
Choctaw Nation has sent money to them with which to come to the 
Indian Territory; the Choctaw Nation has supported them after it 
brought them out there, and the Choctaws have not sought to impose 
a technical bar against them. But after eighty-odd years of attempts 
to bring those people to the Choctaw Nation and to give them some 
of the benefits of our citizenship, it became necessary to dissolve the 
tribal government and to allot the lands in severalty. That has been 
done, and their privilege, which was never a right, has been extin- 
guished. Now. there is one other reason why I w'ould not stand upon 
that technical ground, and that is this: We have relied considerably 
during the ji -o-ument of this case upon the very able decision rendered 
by Judge "W. H. H. Clayton, of the United States court, in the so- 
called Jack Amos case. In relying upon that decision I feel that I 
would be- unfair to this committee and unfair to the gentlemen who 
are opposing us if I should take the portion of that decision that I 
want to rely upon, and repudiate the part of it wdiich holds that that 
privilege did extend to their* heirs. 

Mr. Carter. Let me ask you this question: As was stated yester- 
day in the discussion, this concluding sentence in article 11, which 
has been under consideration, sets out that persons wdio claim under 
this article shall not lose the "privilege" of Choctaw citizenship. 
Now, what would be the "privilege" of a Choctaw citizen? Is it 
not one of the privileges of citizenship that the heirs of the citizen 
shall become citizens of the same country ? 

Mr. Hurley'. It says " persons " and " they," making the language 
as personal as it is possible to make it. 

Mr. Post. Are you limiting it to those in being at the time? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. The privilege of a Choctaw citizen at that 
time was a personal privilege and could not be enjoyed without the 
presence of the person who was to enjoy it in the Choctaw Nation. 
No enjoyment of that privilege could have been had anywhere else. 

Mr. Carter. Let us follow that out a little further. Is it your 
belief that the privilege here intended was a personal privilege 
intended only to extend to persons living at that time ? 

Mr. Hurley. It is. 

Mr. Carter. Now, suppose one of those Indians did remove to the 
Choctaw Nation and did establish his citizenship there, then his 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 129 

children would undoubtedly become citizens of the nation, would 
they not? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Hurley, do you believe that this reservation 
of the privilege of citizenship, if it be so termed, extended to the 
then living children of the heads of families provided for in the 
fourteenth article, or to only the heads of families? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir; I said it extended to the persons who were 
enumerated in the Senate document which I have submitted. 

Mr. Richardson. Why should it extend to a child then living 
and not to a child thereafter born, when the children then living 
did not take under the fourteenth article? 

Mr. Hurley. If 3^ou want to argue that the children then living 
did not take, you are at liberty to argue that, because that argues 
more than two-thirds of the claimants for whom you claim out of 
this case entirel3^ If you want to contend that the children of the 
heads of families who claimed under the fourteenth article are not 
entitled to the privileges granted under that article, then you argue 
your own case to that much smaller margin. 

Mr. Richardson. I do not admit anything of that kind, because I 
think the privilege descended to all such ; but I want to call attention 
to this fact : It was held by the courts of Mississippi that the grant 
made in the fourteenth article was a grant to the head of a family, 
the quantity or extent of that grant being measured by the number 
of children he had, and that the grant was not made to the children ; 
and the Secretary of the Interior, in deciding questions of enrollment 
under section 21 of the Curtis Act providing for the making of the 
rolls, and for the identification of Mississippi Choctaws, held that if 
a person proved his descent from a child who was living at the time 
of the treaty of 1830 it was not sufficient, but that he had to prove 
descent from the head of a family, and prove that the head of the 
family was covered by that article, and that the grant under this sec- 
tion was in no way a grant to children. 

Mr. Carter. But it was intended to be a grant to the parent for 
the child? 

Mr. Richardson. That is just exactly what the court held was not 
the case, that he took it in his own personal capacity, and was not in 
any way acting for or in the interest of or as trustee for the children. 

Mr. Carter. The court held that? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. In what case ? 

Mr. Richardson. I can refer the committee to the citation. 

Mr. Ballinger. That was because the children naturally acquired 
their right through the head of the family, and the court required 
them to trace back to the head of the family. 

Mr. Carter. Did the court hold that the child was not entitled to 
this land when he became of age, whether or not the head of the 
family had died? 

Mr. Richardson. Absolutely. There were two cases. In one case 
they sold the land without accounting to the family in any way. 

Mr. Carter. Was that during minority or after he became of age? 

Mr. Richardson. I do not recall, but in that case the conveyance 
was upheld and the right of the person who had bought from the 

88855—15 y 



130 ENKOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

father was sustained. In the other case, after majority the son 
brought an action against the parent for possession of his allotment, 
find in that case the right was denied. It was held that the father 
took it in his own capacity, and under the decision of Judge Van 
Devanter, when he was the Assistant Attorney General, where a 
person had traced back his ancestry to a child who was living in 
Mississippi in 1830, and the question was submitted whether or not 
the person had to trace back to the head of the family who had 
complied with article 14, it was held that he had to trace back to 
the head of the family. 

Mr. Hurley. If you could trace back to the child, I do not see 
much difficulty about tracing to the head of the family. That is 
very technical argument. If you can prove that a child was a son 
or daughter of a person who did receive a patent or who was entitled 
to receive a patent, and you claimed as descendant from that child, 
I do not see why you have not a complete chain. 

Mr. Richardson. I will introduce both of those decisions. 

Mr. Carter. I would like to see those decisions, because to the un- 
trained mind it seems to be perfectly plain that the land was for the 
benefit of the child. 

Mr. EicHARDSON. The language says, each Choctaw head of a 
family shall thereupon be entitled to a reservation for each unmar- 
ried child over 10 years old. 

Mr. Carter. And " in like manner shall be entitled to one-half that 
quantity for each unmarried child." It seems clear that the grant 
was given to him in a fiduciary capacity for the benefit of the child. 
I suppose it is not very good form to argue about a Supreme Court 
decision. If I should give you a power of attorney to purchase 10 
shares of stock in the Market Co. of Washington for me, that would 
not create the existence of anything on earth in you except that of 
an authorized agent to purchase the stock for me? 

Mr. Richardson. No ; but if the donation were given to each head 
of a family, so much money for each unmarried child 

Mr. Carter (interposing). Of course, the policy of the Federal 
Oovernment toward the Indians would naturally enter largely into 
such a court decision, I should judge. 

Mr. Richardson. I will submit the case. I will bring it before 
the committee at its next hearing. 

Mr. Carter. It seems to me it would hot be the policy of the Fed- 
eral Government to pile up land and heap gifts upon the adult, 
to the exclusion of the minor who is growing up, who must have 
something to educate him and assist him when he becomes of age. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Hurley, in the course of your argument your 
position has been that the allotment made to the fourteenth-article 
claimants under the treaty of 1830 was an extinguishment of their 
right to any further share in the property of the Choctaw Nation. 
Is that correct ? 

Mr. Hurley. No, sir. I have argued that they were given their 
distributive share of the property that the Choctaw Nation then 
owned with the proviso that if they ever left their property that was 
given them and removed to the Choctaw Nation they should not lose 
the privilege of Choctaw citizens, if after moving there they would 
establish their right. 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 131 

Mr. Ballinger. The question of removal was one in which the 
United States alone was concerned, was it not? 

Mr. Hurley. Now, Mr. Ballinger, if T had not covered that verj 
point more than half a dozen times in this hearing I should be glad 
to go into it again, and if the committee so desires I will go over 
that entire matter- 
Mr. Ballinger. I do not want you to go into any elaborate argu- 
ment, but you can answer that question yes or no. 

Mr. Hurley. I do not propose to answer yes or no wdiere you ask 
an involved question and where an answer of either yes or no would 
be incorrect. Every question you ask is so involved that it necessi- 
tates an explanation. 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Hurley, have you concluded your argument? 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Chairman, there are a few points that I wish to 
submit for the consideration of the committee, and I would like about 
15 minutes to conclude. 

Mr. Carter. I think you have covered your part of the case very 
thoroughly. What are the points? 

Mr. Hurley. One point, Mr. Chairman, is that I want this record 
to show in some place the nature of the persons who are now residing in \ 
Mississippi, Alabama, and Louisiana, and who claim to be Choctaws. I 

Mr. Carter. That is fully shown in the McLaughlin report. 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir; but, Mr. Chairman, I do not believe that it 
has been shown that the Indians and the Ouasadi and Conshatta , 
Bands of Indians down there who are full bloods but not Choctaws, i 
but they have made contracts for enrollment as Choctaws, and when 
these people come here and say, " I represent f uU-bloocl Indians," 
1 do not believe that this committee knows that they are not full-blood 
Choctaws. There are many bands of Indians in Alabama, Louisiana, 
and Mississippi who are remnants of the tribes of the great Musko- 
gean stock of Indians. I think I can show that they are not full- 
blood Choctaws. 

Mr. Carter. Proceed, Mi*. Hurley, 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Cantwell stated at the last hearing before this 
committee on this bill, on page 57: 

Thonsniids of those people abjured their citizenship and are not entitled under 
any theoi-y of law to the rights out there. 

And on page 58 : 

For, instead of recognizing that this fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830 
was the first effort of the United States to individualize the Indians— 

You will note, gentlemen, that he argues against Mr. Ballinger's 
contention as to whether it was an individualization of those four- 
teenth-article claimants — 

that this provision of the fourteentli article was a reward to bo given to the ' 
civilized Indian who should attempt to become a citizen of the United States 
and abandon a conununal life, the young men of the Interior Department go 
down there seeking only what they call " full bloods," socking those who 
should most resemble their concept of a primitive Indian, and along the bayous 
and in the forests of Mississippi and Louisiana they found wandering gj'psies 
of every tribe, some of them mixed with the blood of every tribe of southern 
Indians, and they come back and conclude that those are "full-blood Choctaw 
Indians." 

That is the statement of one of the proponents of this bill who is 
not admitting anything that he conceives to be detrimental to his 



132 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

own cause, and this talk about full-blood Choctaws in Mississippi 
is even admitted by the proponents of this bill to be incorrect. You 
have many remnants of tribes. There are no doubt a few Choctaws 
in Mississippi, but they absolutely declined to leave that part of the 
country and to go to the Indian Territory and they have no rights 
under the fourteenth article, but all these full-blood Choctaws we 
are hearing of are not Choctaws at all, but belong to other tribes. 

Mr. Cantwell. And his firm have taken through Mr. A. P. Powell 
contracts with the Conshatta Band of Indians. They have taken 
contracts with the Ouasadi Indians of Kinder, La. — about 800 of 
those. They are really Indians, but they are not Choctaw Indians. 
They come here and represent to this committee that they represent 
full bloods. The 9,500 contracts that Crews & Cantwell hold are 
probably made entirely with persons who have no right under the 
foui-teenth article and who are not Choctaws at all. 

There is just one more remark I want to make in regard to the 
Texas-Oklahoma Co., and that is that company is selling stock or has 
been selling stock, as is shown by the letters that are a part of the 
record in the McLaughlin report. They are selling that stock to 
citizens of the United States on the representation that they are to 
recover so much money for each person they have a contract with. 

Mr. Post. In that connection, that whole letter has been made a part 
of the record ? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Post. And the contract, etc. ? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Post. It is contended on one side that Congress can prevent 
the exaction of unjust fees against these Indians. What do you say 
on that proposition ? 

Mr. Hurley. Here is the situation : In case there is an enrollment, 
which I feel confident there will not be, but in the event that there 
should be, unless those gentlemen get unjust fees from the Indians 
they will not be able to fulfill their promises to those people to whom 
they are selling stock in their company. They can not be honest 
both ways, because if they are square with the Indians they have got 
to defraud those people to whom they are selling stock. 

Mr. Carter. I think the question, if I understood Mr. Post, was 
directed to the point as to whether or not we could prevent the pay- 
ment of those fees by congressional act. 

Mr. Hurley. We must judge the future by the past. They did 
not prevent the taking of the scrip from the Indians when it was 
issued to them under the fourteenth article. I think the lawyers 
sitting around this board all concede that that scrip went to the 
attorneys and agents. 

Now, the Indians in Mississippi are not tribal Indians, they are 
citizens of the United States and of the State of Mississippi, and are 
not under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior. The 
Congress of the United States can control the payment of the fund 
and say how it actually shall be paid to the Indians, but they are 
unrestricted Indians and the Government can not control that money 
for one moment after it is paid to the Indians. 

Mr. Post. In other words, the money may be paid to a citizen of 
the State of Mississippi ? 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 133 

Mr. Hurley. And subject to the jurisdiction of its courts. 

Mr. Post. Of course, Congress can not abridge contractual rights? 

Mr. HuRLEi'. No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. You speak of there being Onasadi and several other 
bands of Indians in Mississippi, and I note that you quoted from 
Mr. Cantwell's statement. Have you any other evidence that there 
are those tribes in the Southern States? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. I have read what is known as the Hand- 
book of North American Indians, prepared and published by the 
Bureau of Ethnology, which shows the existence of all these remnants 
of the tribes. 

Mr. Carter. Please give us the pages of the book so that the com- 
mittee can refer to them. 

Mr. Hurley. I will insert. 

Mr. Richardson. Is it not a fact, Mr. Hurley, that the effect of 
the act of May 30, 1901, which provided that claims of attorneys 
under contract with the Mississippi Choctaws for payment of at- 
torneA'^s' fees should be valid in so far as any property they received 
from the Choctaw Nation or the United States was concerned, 
actually did prohibit the collection of those fees, and that the claim 
of those attorneys was afterwards referred to the Court of Claims 
while the case was still pending in the court? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir; because the Mississippi Choctaws who re- 
covered under that act were readmitted to citizenship in the Choc- 
taw Nation and became restricted members of an Indian tribe and, 
in addition to that, received land, which land was given to them out 
of tribal property, and over which land the United States retained 
restrictions. In this case you ask that money be sent them. The 
United States can not retain the money in a restricted condition 
after it reaches the hand of an individual not a member of a tribe, 
but a citizen of a State subject to the jurisdiction of the laws of that 
State and subject to the laws in relation to contracts in the State. 
Vour idea of the operation of the act of 1901 will not reach a money 
payment to individual citizens of the State of Mississippi. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Hurley, you evidently overlook in this a 
bill which we had drawn and which was introduced for the full 
bloods, and which is now before the committee, in which provision 
is made for the establishment of a fund, the trust fund to be dis- 
bursed under the supervision of the Secretary of the Interior. 

Mr. Hurley. Do you refer now to the Murray bill ? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir. It was a bill which provided that the 
Secretary of the Interior should take jurisdiction. It is bill H. R. 
8007. 

Mr. Hurley. You have not discussed that bill? 

Mr. Richardson. Yes, sir. I told the committee what the features 
of the bill were and ]:)repared a brief, which I sent to the committee. 
Have you examined the provisions of that bill ? 

Mr. Hurley. No, sir; I have not. 

Mr. Richardson. Have you examined the brief which we prepared 
and filed as one of the exhibits to my argument? 

Mr. Hurley. No; I was not presented with a copy of your brief. 

Mr. Richardson. I regret that very much. I thought I had sent 
you a copy of my brief. I had intended to. This bill, in section 2, 
provides that the funds shall be placed to the .credit of the indi- 



134 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

viduals that might be enrolled as Mississippi Choctaws under this act 
and disbursed as a trust fund for their benefit, and that supervision 
over their affairs shall be exercised through an agency under the 
direction of the Secretary of the Interior. This bill, I might say, 
provides for the identified and enrolled full bloods. Is there any- 
thing in the law, so far as you know, that would prevent such an 
exercise of supervision over the affairs of these Indians ? 

Mr. Hurley. Where do you expect to get your funds? 

Mr. Richardson. For what purpose ? 

Mr. Hurley. You say that you are going to establish a trust fund 
for these Indians, and you have asked me if there is anything in the 
law which would prevent such a thing, and I ask you where you are 
going to get the trust funds. 

Mr. Richardson. Regardless of where the trust funds might come 
from, I intended my question to apply. The purpose of this bill is 
to set aside a portion of the funds. 

Mr. Hurley. There is a legal bar against setting aside any part 
of the Choctaw-Chickasaw funds for persons who are not citizens 
of those tribes. 

Mr. Richardson. That is, of course, an entirely different question. 
Wliat I asked you w^as whether there was any opposition to that part 
of the bill which provides for the administration of whatever funds 
these Indians may get and from whatever source they may come? 

Mr. Hurley. I think I answered that question fully in reply to 
Mr. Post. I said that if the United States should give the Mississippi 
Choctaws money until the delivery of that money to the persons to 
whom it belongs, the United States, under proper law, could control 
it, but just as soon as it goes into the hands of an individual there- 
upon the jurisdiction of the United States ends and the jurisdiction 
of the State in which that Indian is a resident and citizen attaches, 
and all the laws of contract relating to that money attaches to the 
Indian when he becomes the owner and the possessor of it as an 
individual citizen. 

Mr. Richardson. Another question : Is it not a fact that Congress 
has the power to impose a condition to its payment of money to any 
person, citizens of the United States of any class, that if an attorney 
receives a fee over a certain amount from that citizen for services 
in connection with securing the fund, he shall be guilty of a penal 
offense and be punished accordingly? 

Mr. Hurley. An attempt to have that made a law in regard to 
the contracts made with Indians affecting their tribal property 
failed because it was held to be unconstitutional. 

Mr. Post. Do you mean to say that Congress can put penalties 
upon the citizens of any State? Are not the rights to prescribe the 
duties of a citizen entirely withheld by the States and not delegated 
to the Federal Government? 

Mr. Rchardson. I mean to say that Congress has, for instance, in 
the payment of claims for personal injuries sustained by various per- 
sons at the hands of the United States or some of its agencies, at' 
tached a condition that no fee in excess of a certain fixed percentage 
would be paid to or received by any attorney or agent for prose- 
cuting that claim ; and it has provided that the violation of that 
shall be a penal offense, punishable by prosecution in the United 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 136 

States courts, and it fixes the penalties. I want to say also that in the 
act of Congress which provided for the payment of some six or 
eight hundred claims for overtime by letter carriers a provision was 
inserted that no fee in excess of 5 per cent should be collected by or 
paid to any attorney or agent for prosecuting any of those claims, 
and the collection or receipt of any fee in excess of that amount 
was made a penal offense. 

Mr. Post. The same thing applies in pension matters. 

Mr. Richardson. In pension matters, of course, there are other 
considerations, such as the fact that the money is paid as a bounty 
for public service, but this other matter related to contracts. It was 
a question of a contract between the letter carriers and the United 
States; the claim was based upon a contract, and the contention was 
that they were entitled to it as a matter of right. 

Mr. Ballinger. You have the same provision in reference to our 
homestead laws; the homestead of a man is exempt from the opera- 
tions of any contract or lien made prior to patent. 

Mr, Post. I can see quite a distinction between those cases and 
a case where the local attorney makes a contract between himself and 
a citizen of the State. 

Mr. Carter. Let us put that just this way: Suppose before you had 
a law exempting homesteads from execution that an attorney should 
make a contract with a man to assist him in getting his homestead 
and he should get his homestead, then could you, after he had ac- 
quired the homestead, entail any such conditions upon him to violate 
the obligations of the contract that you had made? 

Mr. Ballinger. The conditions of the homestead law would apply. 

Mr. Carter. If the homestead law was in existence at the time the 
contract was made? 

Mr. Richardson. I should like to answer that, Mr. Carter. In 
one of these personal-injury cases, the case of Peters v. Gunderson, 
the claimant, who had been injured out in St. Louis, and who was not 
an employee of the Government, had a claim for, I think, the falling 
of an elevator or some shaft in a building, and he was unable to get 
any compensation for it in any regular channel, so he employed a 
firm of lawyers in St. Louis, with associations in Washington,, to 
prosecute his claim. 

Mr. Post. Against whom? 

Mr. Richardson. Against the Government to recover for damages 
for those personal injuries. A bill was introduced in Congress on 
reference to the Court of CL'iims for adjudication under the provi- 
sions of the Tucker and Bowman Acts. The Court of Chiims made a 
finding of fact holding he was entitled to a cei'tain amount of money 
compensation for damages caused by' negligence of Government offi- 
cers. Congress in providing for the ]:)ayment of that claim inserted 
the provision that no fee should be paid or received by the attorneys 
adjudicating the claim greater than 10 per cent. The attorneys in 
that case had a contract for 30 per cent, but it was made a penal 
offense for them to obtain or receive more than 10 per cent by an act 
of appropriation made five years after their contract had been made 
with a citizen of the United States. 

Mr. Post. Did they undertake to recover their 30 per cent? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Is that an adjudicated case? 



136 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CmLIZED TRIBES. 

Mr.- Richardson. The courts have held in a series of decisions ex- 
tending- over 50 years that Conoress has the power — it was held in 
the Indian depredation claims, in which the act of March 3, 1891, 
provided that in no case exceeding $300 should a fee of over 15 
per cent be received, and under $300 a fee of 20 per cent, and that 
was decided in the courts. 

Mr. Carter. Do j^ou know of any instance in which a contract w as 
made with Indians for the collection of Indian money, the recovery 
of any amount that might be due them, wherein the attorneys have 
been refused any consideration — wherein they have been refused pay 
for their services ? 

Mr. Richardson. I can not at the present time state any case where 
they have been refused. I know of cases where they have not been 
able to collect it yet. 

Mr. Carter. I understand that; but they have not abandoned the 
case? 

Mr. Richardson. No, sir. I myself am in that position. 

Mr. Carter. You have heard Mr. Cantwell's statement on that 
subject, have you not? 

Mr. Richardson. My recollection is that I heard Mr. Cantwell say 
this. I am not sure whether it is very accurate, because I have 
always felt very strongly myself on the subject and his ideas did not 
entirely agree with mine; that is to say, he practically admitted that 
it would be necessary for them to collect the fees; that some pro- 
vision be made for fixing the fee, and he said that in this bill a 
provision was made ratifjdng the contract for a reasonable amount. 

Mr. Carter. No; as I remember. Mr. CantwelFs statement was 
that the Senate amendment placed in the bill attempting to invali- 
date those contracts was itself invalid and would operate to invali- 
date them, and that they could not be invalidated by Congress. That 
is my recollection of his statement, and I think the record will show 
that." 

Mr. Richardson. I do not recall that particular statement. The 
fact is that the chair asked the different counsel present on one oc- 
casion whether they were willing to leave the matter of their fees 
to the judgment of the committee, and I stated, on behalf of myself 
and those who have been associated with me in the matter, that we 
were perfectly willing to leave the question of fee and amount of fee 
to the committee, and I am still of that view. 

Mr. Carter. If the committee should agree to readjudicate some 
of these cases in determining even the quantity of the fee and say 
it should be paid, it would be necessary for the committee, perhaps, 
to take into consideration tlie laws of the land as they existed when 
the contracts were made, as well as those existing now, and whether 
those laws were valid or invalid; whether they would stand the test 
of the courts. 

Are you through, Mr. Hurley ? 

Mr. Hurley. I want to say just a few words in conclusion. I fear 
there has been so much informal argument between this conclusion 
and where I left off my argument that the casual reader of the record 
might not understand that this is a conclusion to my argument. 
_ On account of the interruptions which I have received by ques- 
tions both from the members of the committee and the opposing 
counsel, it has been impossible for me to present the facts and argue 



ENKOLLMEKT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 137 

the law to the committee in a logical sequence. I feel, however, that 
we have covered the important points in the case. I will be followed 
by my colleague, Mr. Reford Bond, attorney for the Chickasaws, 
who will cover the points that I have omitted and who will analyze 
and explain the cases that have been cited by our opponent in sup- 
port of their contentions. 

I wish to say that the statements of Mr. Harrison that I have 
referred to in this argument are statements that were made by him 
in an uninterrupted argument. I have not sought to take up any of 
the statements that he made in the heat of debate, but have taken 
the statements that I believe to be most fair and that had been given 
most consideration by him — statements not made in the heat of dis- 
cussion, but in an uninterrupted presentation of the case. 

I have not had the time to go as fully as I would like to have gone 
into the arguments of Mr. Cantwell to show the inaccuracy of his 
statements and of the propositions of law laid down by him. I feel 
that it is useless to consider each of his inaccurate statements sepa- 
rately, for the reason that all his arguments are now fully answered 
in the record. 

Let me state briefly to the committee what, in my opinion, this 
record now discloses: 

First, every claimant for citizenship in the Choctaw Nation under y 
the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830 who complied with the 
terms of that article and removed to the Choctaw Nation and estab- 
lished a residence there within a required time has been enrolled and 
is now enjoying the privileges of Choctaw citizenship. 

Second, that no Indian residing in Mississippi or elsewhere had ^ 
any right to the privileges of Choctaw citizenship reserved to him, 
except the fourteenth article claimants. 

Third, every court and tribunal that has ever passed upon this \ 
question has found that the fourteenth article claimants had no 
right to citizenship in the Choctaw Nation without having first re- 
moved to and established a residence in that nation. 

Fourth, that the Dawes Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes ' 
reported in 1809 that there were very few, if any, Indians residing 
in Mississippi who could prove their right under the fourteenth 
article. Since that time 1,627 persons claiming as Mississippi Choc- 
taws have been enrolled as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. The i 
great majority of these persons were full bloods and were admitted 
without being required to prove their descent from a fourteenth 
article claimant. It is my opinion that this record discloses that' 
there is not now in Mississippi any person who could honestly prove 
his descent from a fourteenth article claimant if given the oppor- 
tunity to do so; for the reason that the record discloses the fact that 
all descendants of those claimants have long since removed to and 
become citizens of the Choctaw Nation west; that there is not now 
an Indian residing in Mississippi who at any time heretofore had a 
legal or equitable right to citizenship in the Choctaw Nation. All 
of those who had such rights have been enrolled, but the full-blood 
Indians residing in Mississippi, if any there be. who could not ]>i-ove 
their descent from a fourteenth article claimant have been offci-ed 
enrollment as a gratuity if they would remove to the Choctaw 
Nation. A great number did remove and were enrolled. Those Avho 
are now in Mississippi decline to remove. The time within which 
they could accept the benefits of this offer of citizenship has expired 



138 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

by the limitations placed upon it by the Choctaw-Chickasaw people 
and by the Congress of the United States. There is not an Indian 
in Mississippi who has a legal, equitable, or a moral right to enroll- 
ment in the Choctaw Nation. 

To enroll, as a citizen of the Choctaw Nation, any Indian now 
residing in Mississippi, Congress must reverse the decision of the 
Dawes Commission, which it authorized to determine the question 
of their right to enrollment ; it must reverse the decisions of the 
courts that have passed upon the question; it must violate the pro- 
visions of its own agreement made with the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
people on July 1. 1902; and it must repeal its own act of April 26, 
1906. Congress must do all these things before any claimant for 
enrollment as a Mississippi Choctaw can be enrolled, and when Con- 
gress does these things it will create a claim against the United 
States Government in favor of the Choctaw and Chickasaw people 
of Oklahoma for the amount of their property given under such a 
law to the claimants. 

Just for a moment, Mr. Chairman, let us see who is appearing 
here as the representatives of these Mississippi Choctaws, and by 
what right they appear. 

The Record shows that Mr. Ballinger is appearing under the M. M. 
Lindley contract, made in 1896 for a period of 10 years. The con- 
tract expired in 1906. The portion of this contract which was in- 
troduced as evidence in the Court of Claims in the so-called Winton 
case shows upon its face that it expired in 1906. 

Mr. Richardson is appearing here under a contract made with 
J. E. Arnold 

Mr. Ballinger. I have made it plain that I have some individual 
contracts, so that those would certainly entitle me to recover. 

Mr. Hurley. You have not submitted your individual contracts. 

Mr. Ballinger. Yes; I have submitted a sample of them, a copy 
of them. 

Mr. Hurley. How many are there? 

Mr. Ballinger. About 50. 

Mr. Hurley. The record discloses that you and your partner at 
one time claimed to represent from 13,000 to 15,000 claimants. I 
believe you stated in the record that you and your partner did not 
represent more than 5,000. You now state that in all this number 
you have only about 50 Mississippi Choctaw contracts. 
' Mr. Richardson is appearing here under a contract alleged to have 
been made with J. E. Arnold in 1897. Arnold was thereafter de- 
barred from practice by the Department of the Interior. Arnold 
is not now, nor never has been, an attorney at law. His disbarment 
was the result of his conduct in matters pertaining to Mississippi 
Choctaws. He was reinstated by the department on the promise 
that he would not reengage in this practice, but intended to enter the 
ministry. 

Crews & Cantwell appear here under the authority, they claim, 
through contracts obtained by A. P. Powell. Powell's character, 
and the manner through Avhich he obtained the contracts, are shown 
by this record to be at variance with the principles of common de- 
cency and legal ethics. 

The contracts held by Crews & Cantwell and held for them by the 
Texas Oklahoma Investment Co. are champertous, and according to 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 139 

their own admissions these contracts were obtained in violation of 
paragraphs 26, 27, and 28 of the Code of Ethics adapted by the 
American Bar Association. 

Mr. Richardson, I know you do not want to be unfair, but in the 
original contract of 1897 of course Mr. Arnold was a party named, 
and in the contract which we offered, executed in May, 1913, under 
which we now appear, our firm was named as one of the parties. 

Mr. Hurley. But your contract reverts back upon its own face to 
a contract made in 1897 with J. E. Arnold, and it is under the au- 
thority of that original contract that you now resume his case and 
become a representative. 

Now, Mr. Chairman, the time within which I was to have closed 
has expired, and I have not time to enter into a discussion of the sec- 
tions of the Code of Ethics to which I have referred, or to show the 
committee the applicability of those sections to the conduct of the 
gentlemen who are appearing in this litigation. I will ask that the 
sections which I have referred to be inserted after my remarks. I 
am quoting these sections from a book containing the rules of admis- 
sion to the bar of the Supreme Court of the United States. 

I do not think it unfair to say that I do not believe that there is a 
contract held by any of the attorneys who are now appearing before 
this committee witli any Mississippi Choctaw claimant that was not 
procured in violation of paragraph 28 hereinafter quoted. 

The Mississippi Choctaws are not causing this litigation. The 
litigation is caused by the agents and runners who are employed by 
attorneys to incite the Mississippi Choctaws to make a claim against 
the Choctaws and Chickasaws of Oklahoma with the hope that these 
attorneys and agents and runners may be able to develop such force 
in Washington as to compel the Choctaws and Chickasaws to offer 
a compromise by which these attorneys and agents and runners may 
profit. The McLaughlin report substantiates this statement. I do 
not believe that any lawyer believes that he will establish a right 
for any Mississippi Choctaw for enrollment in the Choctaw Nation 
west, because such a right does not exist, and therefore can not be 
established. 

Paragraphs 26, 27, and 28, Code of Ethics, adopted by the Amer- 
ican Bar Association, annotated to cases in point: 

26. Professional advocacy other than before courts. — A lawyer openly and in 
his true character may render professional services before learislative or other 
bodies regarding proposed legislation and in advocacy of claims before depart- 
ments of Government upon the same principles of ethics which justify his ap- 
pearance before the courts; but it is unprofessional for a lawj'er so engaged 
to conceal his attorneyship, or to employ secret personal solicitations, or to use 
nic'iis othi'i- tli;in those addressed to the reison and understanding to influence 
action. 

Annot. 

\';ilidity of lobbying contracts, see Contract. Cent. Dig., pp. 5ST-5S0; Dec. 
Dig., p. 126. 

27. Advertising, direct or indirect. — The most worthy and effective advertise- 
ment possible, even for a young lawyer, and especially with his brother law- 
yers is Ihc estalilishmeut of a well-nioritod n'ltutation for professional c.-ipacity 
and fidelity to trust. This can not be forced, but must be the outcome of char- 
acter and conduct. The publication or circulation of ordinary business cards, 
being a matter of personal taste or local custom, and sometimes of convenience, 
Is not per se improper. But solicitation of business by circulars or advertise- 
ments or by personal relations is unprofessional. It is equally unprofessional 
to procure business by indirection through touters of any kind, whether allied 
real estate firms or trust companies advertising to secure the drawing of deeds 



140 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

or wills or offering retainers in exchange for executorships or trusteeships to 
be influenced by tlie Inwyer. Imlireet iuivertiseinent for business by furnishing 
or inspiring newspaper comment concerning causes in which the lawyer has 
been or is engaged, or concerning the manner of their conduct, the magnitude 
of the interests involved, the Importance of the lawyer's positions, and all 
other like self'-l.-iudntion. defy the traditions and lower the tone of our high 
calling, and are intolerable. 

Annot. 

Advertising to secure divorces as ground for disbarment. (See Attorney and 
Client, Cent. Dig., p. 51: Dec. Dig., p. 38.) 

28. Stirring up litigation, directly or through agents. — It is unprofessional 
for a lawyer to volunteer advice to bring a lawsuit, except in r;ire eases where 
ties of blood, relationship, or trust make it his duty to do so. Stirring up strife 
and litigation is not only unprofessional, but it is indictable nt conuuon law. 
It is disreputable to hunt np defects in titles or other causes of action and 
inform thereof in order to be employed to bring suit, or to breed litigation by 
vseeking out those with claims for personal injuries or those having any other 
grounds of action in order to secure them as clients, or to employ agents or 
lunners for like pui'poses, or to pay or reward, directly or indirectly, those who 
bring or intiuenee the bringing of such c;ises to his office, or to remunerate 
policemen, court or prison officials, physicians, hospital attaches, or others who 
may succeed, under the guise of giving disinterested friendly advice, in influenc- 
ing the criminal, the sick, and the injured, the ignorant, or others, to seek his 
professional services. A duty to the public and to the profession devolves upon 
every member of the bar, having knowledge of such practices upon the part of 
any practitioner, immediately to inform thereof to the end that the offender 
may be disbarred. 

Annot. 

Stirring up litigation and other unprofessional conduct, ground for disbar- 
ment. (See Attorney and Client. Dig.. i)]i. 47-84: Dec. Dig., pp. 34-61.) 

Barratry in general. ( See Champerty and Maintenance, Cent. Dig., pp. 1-51 ; 
Dec. Dig., pp. 1-6.) 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Richardson, do you wish to ask Mr. Hurley any 
question ? 

Mr. Richardson. No, r;ir; not about that. 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Arnold, do you ? 

Mr. Arnold, No, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Do you, Mr. Ballinger? 

Mr. Ballinger. I want to make just one brief statement to go into 
the record relative to the reference made to the authority under 
which I appear. 

The authority under which I appear was a contract taken in the 
spring of 1897 in the name of M. M. Linley, under which Chester 
Howe and Walter Field were associated with him. The contract, I 
think, ran for a period of 10 years, but during the period of 10 years 
they succeeded in securing the legislation under which practically all 
of those persons for whom I am now appearing were identified by 
the commission and by the department, and it is on a continuation of 
those services, the greater portion of which have already been ren- 
dered, that I am now^ appearing before this committee. 

Mr. Hurley. You do not deny that the contract to which you refer 
expired in 1906? 

Mr. Ballinger. I think by the terms of the contract itself it ex- 
pired in 1907. 

Mr. Hurley. And you do not claim that you have had that con- 
tract renewed? 

Mr. Ballinger. I do not claim there has been a renewal of that 
contract, 

Mr. Hurley. That is what I stated in the record, so your explana-! 
tion is unnecessary. 



REPORT ON H. R. 12586. 

January 2, 1915. 
Hon. John H. Stephens, 

Chairman House CoTnmittee on Indian Affairs^ 

Washington^ D. G. ^ 

Sir: Your subcommittee appointed to investigate and report on 
H. R. 12586 begs leave to submit the following observations: 

A careful and painstaking investigation of all treaties, laws, and 
other records bearing on this claim, including hearings lasting from 
April 1, 1914, until August 27, 1914, was gone into by your com- 
mittee. 

H. R. 12586 directs : 

1. The Secretary of the Interior to enroll certain Mississippi Choc- 
taws upon the rolls of the Choctaw Nation in Oklahoma with a full 
participation in their tribal estate. 

2. To reopen the Choctaw^ rolls for the adjudication of 20,000 or 
more alleged claimants. 

There are some Choctaws still remaining in Mississippi who have ^ 
persistently refused and successfully resisted all efforts of the Fed- 
eral Government and the Choctaw Nation to have them move west 
and affiliate with the tribe. 

The testimony before the subcommittee discloses many thousands 
of persons of doubtful descent, African and other, living in Missis- 
sippi and surrounding States, who have attempted to assert claims 
as Choctaw Indians. 

Such Indians of real Choctaw blood as still reside in Mississippi 
appear to take little interest in the claims asserted by their alleged 
attorneys. On the other hand, those claiming remote Indian blood 
and of doubtful descent have manifested much interest in being 
enrolled and sharing in a division of the Choctaw funds in Oklahoma. 

The contention of these latter seems to have been inspired and 
augmented by certain attorneys who have sent agents among these 
people advising them that they were Indians and taking contracts 
for their enrollment for a contingent fee of from 30 to 40 per cent 
of recovery, and in many instances a small cash I'etainer in addition. 

According to statements and admissions of these attorneys and 
their agents, two firms alone, those of Cantwell & Crews, of St. Louis, 
Mo., and Ballinger & Lee, of Washington City, D. C, and Ardmore, 
Okla., hold contiacts with 15,596 individuals, carrying provisions for 
fees aggregating $10,882,815. 

The testimony furtlior shows that a syndicate for the pur]:»ose of 
securing the enrollment of Mississippi Choctaws and a participation 
in the tribal estate of the western Choctaws has been formed under 

141 



142 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

the name " The Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co.," capitalized at 
$100,000, $25,000 of which has been paid in and used. The directors 
of this corporation are S. L. Hurlbut, of El Campo, Tex. ; H. Master- 
son and W. A. Smith, of Houston, Tex, ; and T. B. Crews and H. J. 
Cantwell, of St. Louis, Mo. 

This claim of the Mississippi Choctaw attorneys for enrollment of 
their clients and participation in the Choctaw Nation's estate is by 
no means a new contention. The claim was, under direction of law, 
fully adjudicated by the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes 
(House Doc. 274, 55th Cong., 2d sess.) and afterwards by the Federal 
court, to Avhich appeal was taken (Jack Amos et al. v. The Choctaw 
Nation, Decisions of United States courts in Indian Territory, 465), 
both decisions being adverse to the Mississippi Choctaw contention 
for enrollment. 

In rejecting the claim of nonresident Mississippi Choctaws the 
Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes said in part : 

This historical review of the acquisition of this territory by the Choctaw 
Nation and its subsequent legal relations to it makes it clear in the opinion of 
this counuissiou that the Mississippi Choctaws are not under their treaties en- 
titled to all rights of Choctaw citizenship except an Interest in the Choctaw 
annuities and still continue their residence and citizenship in Mississippi. 
(House Doc. 274, 55th Cong., 2d sess.) 

In affirming the decision the United States District Court for the 
Central District of Indian Territory closed its decision with the fol- 
lowing paragraph : 

Toperniitnien with, perchance, but a strain of Choctaw blood in their veins, who, 
65 years ago, broke away from their kindred and their natioa, and during that 
time, or the most of it, have been exercising the rights of citizenship and doing 
homage to the sovereignty of another nation, and have become strangers to the 
people, to reach forth their hands from their distant and alien homes aud lay 
hold on a part of the public domain, the common property of the i>eople, and 
appropriate to their own u.se, would be unjust and inequitable. It is therefore 
the opinion of the court that the absent Mississippi Choctaws are not entitled 
to be enrolled as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. The action of the D:iwes 
Commission is therefore affirmed and a decree will be entered for the Choctaw 
Nation. (Jack Amos et al. v. the Choctaw Nation, Decisions of United States 
courts in Indian Territory, 465.) 

An appeal was taken from these decisions by the attorneys for the 
Mississippi Choctaws to the Supreme Court of the United States and 
the Jack Amos case was dismissed upon motion of the attorneys for 
the Mississippi Choctaws (190 U. S., 873). 

Several years subsequent to the date of these decisions excluding 
the Mississippi Choctaws from enrollment this matter w^as again 
taken up and readjusted by the legally constituted authorities of 
the Federal Government and the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
in Oklahoma, by which agreement the Mississippi ChoctaAvs were 
given additional time for identification and establishment of bona 
fide residence in the Choctaw Nation in Indian Territory. (Supple- 
mental agreement, "An act to ratify and affirm the agreement with 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes of Indians, etc.," approved July 
1, 1002.) 

The Choctaw Nation in Oklahoma has dealt justly and liberally 
with the ISIississippi Choctaws, always granting them full citizenship 
in their nation with all emoluments thereto whenever they would 
agree to affiliate with the tribe, and the Choctaw Nation in Okla- 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 143 

homa is under no legal, equitable, or moral obligation to enroll the \ 
Mississippi Choctaws as citizens of the tribe in the West at this time. 

By the agreements negotiated between the Federal Government (i 
and the Choctaw Nation all native western Choctaws were required 
to be on the reservation by June 28, 1898, or stand debarred from 
enrollment and participation in the tribal estate forever thereafter, 
and this rule has been strictly adhered to. 

The time for establishment of residence on the reservation was 
extended to the Mississippi Choctaw claimants until July 1, 1903, 
giving the Mississippi Choctaws five years to move on the reserva- 
tion after the time for establishment of such residence had been closed 
to the native Choctaws. 

After 11 years were consumed by the Commission to the Five 
Civilized Tribes in making up the rolls of the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Nations such rolls were affirmatively closed by action of Con- 
gress on March 4, 1907. 

The rolls of the Choctaw Nation were held open to the Mississippi ' 
Choctaws from 1830 until March 4, 1907, giving the Mississippi 
Choctaws 77 j^ears in which to complete enrollment with full benefits 
of citizenship. 

The Federal Government as such is neither legally nor equitably ' 
obligated to enroll Mississippi Choctaws with the Choctaws west, and 
is under only such moral obligation to the Mississippi Choctaws as 
is due to dependent North American Indians who were originally 
occupants and owners of the soil and who have been deprived of their 
patrimony by white settlers. 

The passage of H. R. 12586 would completely upset and undo 11 
years of careful, painstaking work of the Interior Department in 
settling the aifairs of the Five Civilized Tribes, turn the wheels of 
progress backwards for more than 20 years, and, as has been said by 
President Taft, " open up a Pandora's box of troubles, which the life 
of the present generation might not see closed." 

The passage of H. R. 12586 would doubtless result in stupendous 
claims of millions of dollars against the Federal Government on the 
part of the Oklahoma Choctaws because of a division of their funds 
among persons whom the Federal commissions and Federal courts 
have decided were not entitled thereto. 

Its passage would lend encouragement to grafting attorneys with 
contracts for enormous attorneys' fees, running into millions of 
dollars, and hold out inducement for procuring additional contracts 
from spurious claimants. 

Your subcommittee therefore recommends that the Harrison bill 
(H. R. 12586) be not favorably reported by the House Committee on 
Indian Affairs. 

Respectfully submitted. 

C. D. Carter, Chairman. 
J. D. Post. 
RoRT. P. Hill. 
P. P. Campbell. 



REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR ON 
THE HARRISON BILL (H. R. 12586). 



The Secretary of the Interior, 

Washington, January 8, 1915. 

My Dear Mr. Stephens: I have the honor to refer herein to a com- 
munication of August 12, 1914, from Hon. C. D. Carter, then acting 
chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs of the House of Repre- 
sentatives, with which was inclosed a copy of H. R. 12586, entitled 
"A bill to reopen the roUs of the Choctaw-Chickasaw Tribe and to 
provide for the awarding of the rights secured to certain persons by 
the fourteenth article of the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek, of date 
September 27, 1830." He also referred to H. R. 4536 and requested 
that I consider the two bUls together and make a report thereon. 

Upon examination of H. R. 4536, I find that said bill is identical 
with H. R. 19213, introduced by Mr. Harrison of Mississippi in the 
Sixty-second Congress, second session, upon which last-mentioned 
bill the department submitted to your committee a report dated July 
2, 1912. H. R. 12586, introduced in the present Congress by Mr. 
Harrison, is a similar bill to the above-mentioned bills except that in 
said H. R. 12586 an additional paragraph is included in section 2 to 
provide for the enrollment of all persons who were identified as Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws by the Dawes Commission in its report of March 
10, 1899, commonly known as the McKennon roll, and of all persons 
identified as Mississippi Choctaws by the Dawes Commission from 
March 10, 1899, to March 4, 1907, whose identification was approved 
by the Secretary of the Interior but whose names did not appear on 
the final citizenship rolls of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. 

The claims of Mississippi Choctaw Indians to recognition as 
citizens of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma and to share in the 
property of said Nation are based upon article 14 of the treaty of 
September 27, 1830. (7 Stat. L., 335.) Pursuant to the terms of the 
treaty, a large number of Choctaws were transferred from Mississippi 
to the country west, later known as Indian Territory. These Choc- 
taws who so removed and tlieir descendants now constitute the 
main body of what is known as the Choctaw Nation. There were, 
however, a considerable numb(>r of Choctaws who remained behind in 
Mississippi, some of them under the provisions of article 14 above 
mentioned. 

Said article 14 provided that the persons who claimed thereunder 
shouhl not lose the {)rivilege of a Choctaw citizen, but if they ever 
removed were not to be entitled to any part of the Choctaw annuity. 
The Indians who remained behind untk'r the provisions of said article 
14 received either land in Mississij)j)i or scrip, which gave the appli- 
cants the right to enter public lands in certain Southern States. A 
88855—15 10 145 



146 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

part of suid scri|), however, was later commuted by a money payment. 
Some of the fourteenth-article claimants later made their way west 
and joined the main bod}^ of the tribe in the Indian Territory. The 
Choctaw Council by various acts recognized the right of said absentee 
Mississippi Choctaws to remove to the nation, and actually invited 
them to do so. 

Under the provisions of the Atoka agreement with the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Tribes contained in the act of Congress of June 28, 
1898 (30 Stat. L., 495), the supplemental agreement contained in the 
act of July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. L., 641), and later acts of Congress for 
the purpose of carrying out the provisions of said agreements, the 
claims of indivithial Mississippi Choctaw Indians to be identified and 
to be enrolled as entitled to share in the property of the Choctaw 
Nation were fully considered by the Commission to the Five Civilized 
Tribes and by the department after fiiU hearing, at which the claim- 
ants had ample opportunity to present aU the evidence which they 
could procure in support of their claims. Very few claimants were 
able to prove descent from an ancestor who received or ap])lied for 
benefits under the provisions of article 14 of the treaty of 1830. 

The history of the Dawes Commission enrollment work relative 
to Mississippi Choctaw claimants is very fuUy set out in a communi- 
cation of April 14, 1914, from William O. Beall, at one time secretary 
of the commission to the Five Civilized Tribes. A copy thereof is 
inclosed for your information. 

For your further information as to the history of the Mississippi 
Choctaw claims and of the department action in the preparation of 
the final rolls there is inclosed a copy of department letter of July 2, 
1912, to the chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs of the 
House of Representatives. 

Judge William H. H. Clayton in his decision in the case of Jack 
Amos V. The Choctaw Nation, a copy of which may be found in the 
appendix of the annual report of the Commission to the Five Civilized 
Tribes for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1901, said that no treaty or 
acts of the Choctaw Council or of any officer of the Choctaw Council 
since the treaty of 1830 could be cited, or at least he had not found 
them, whereby any right or privilege had been conferred, granted, 
or recognized in or to a Mississippi Choctaw so long as he remained 
away from his people, and that no right was recognized or conferred 
upon such absent Indian except upon the condition that he should 
remove to the nation, and the right was not to be consummated or 
enjoyed until actual removal. 

Mississippi Choctaw Indians who, while the opportunity was 
theirs imder the privileges accorded them, refused to emigrate with 
the tribe to the new country west, and who never shared in the bur- 
dens and hardships of the pioneer life incident to the establishment 
of the new tribal government west of the Mississippi, have at this 
late date (now that the tribal property of the Choctaw Nation made 
valuable by the emigrants is being divided per capita among the 
enrolled recognized citizens of the nation) no equitable right to 
share in said property. 

With respect to the persons who were identified by the Dawes 
Commission as Mississippi Choctaws under the provisions of the act 
of Congress of June 28, 1898 (30 Stat. L., 495), but who failed to 
remove and make settlement in the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 147 

as required by the act of Congress of July 1, 1902 (32 Stat, h., 641, 
sees. 41, 42, 43, and 44), it may be said that, irrespective of their 
unfortunate condition of poverty and ignorance, there is no ground, 
legal or equitable, for holding the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
responsible for the failure of said identified persons to comply with 
the law as to removal and settlement. No obligation rested upon 
the United States to provide means for the removal of such Indians. 

Referring to the class of claimants whose names were contained in 
an identification roll submitted by the Commission to the Five 
Civilized Tribes on March 10, 1899, but never approved by the Secre- 
tary of the Interior, your attention is invited to the fact that the 
commission soon recognized the inaccuracy and incompleteness of 
that roll and requested the department to disregard it and to return 
the same to the commission. In order that there might be no doubt 
as to the standing of said roll, it was disapproved by the department 
on March 1, 1907. The larger part of the persons whose names were 
contained on that disapproved roU,were afterwards placed on the 
approved identification rolls, and those who complied with the law 
as to removal and settlement were enrolled on the final rolls of 
Mississippi Choctaw Indians. 

In the investigation and examination of Mississippi Choctaw claims 
made in 1900 and the years following by the Commission to the Five 
Civilized Tribes every effort that was possible to be made was made 
by said commission to reach all persons who had any equitable claim 
to recognition as Mississippi Choctaws, and especially to find those 
who were full-blood Choctaw Indians. 

H. R. 4536 and 12586 in effect provide, so far as the Mississippi 
Choctaw claimants are concerned, a general reopening of the rolls of 
the Choctaw Nation, necessitating a review of all the cases which had 
been adversely decided by the United States courts, the Department 
of the Interior, and the Choctaw and Chickasaw Citizensliip Court, as 
well as the consideration of claims not heretofore presented or con- 
sidered, and em]:)Ower the Secretary of the Interior to determine the 
rights of the claimants upon such evidence as may be produced by 
the applicants, without regard to any adverse judgment or decision 
heretofore rendered by an> court or commission to the Five Civilized 
Tribes, or the Department of the Interior, and without regard to any 
condition or disability heretofore imposed by any act of Congress. 

The records of the department show tliat Mississippi Choctaw 
claimants have been to an unusual extent the victims of numerous 
extortionate contracts, and the correspondence in many cases indi- 
cates that contracts were obtained through misrepresentations as to 
the facts, and in some cases that such contracts were obtained from 
claimants who believed that the persons obtaining the contracts 
were (lovernment agents. Your attention i^- invited to the report 
of Inspector McLaughlin, of this department, which report appears in 
print in the Congressional Record of Julv 10, 1914, commencing on 
page 13022. 

Referring to section 9 of said bills, I am of the opinion that, in view 
of the large amount of tribal property yet to be disposed of and of 
other matters affecting the trioes, it would be inadvisable to abolish 



148 ENBOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

the tribal organization of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations at the 
present time. 

In view of the facts as presented to me, I am of the opinion that 
no legislation should be enacted for the reopening of the rolls of the 
Chotcaw Nation for the benefit of the Mississippi Choctaw claimants. 
Very truly, yours, 

Franklin K. Lane. 
Hon. John H. Stephens, 

CJiairman Committee on Indian Affairs, 
House of Representatives. 



Part Eight 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES 
HEARINGS 

BEFORE THE 

SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE 
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ON THE SUBJECT OF ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE 
CIVILIZED TRIBES 



STATEMENT OF 

REFORD BOND 

ATTORNEY FOR THE CHICKASAW NATION IN OPPOSITION 
TO ENROLLMENT OF MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAWS 






WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OPriOE 

1916 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED 

TEIBES. 



Subcommittee of Committee on Indian Affairs, 

House of Representatives, 

Friday^ August IJf.^ 19 Uf. 
The subcommittee met at 10.30 o'clock a. m/, Hon. Charles D. 
Carter (chairman) presiding. 

The Chairman. Mr. Bond, you may proceed. 

STATEMENT OF MR. REFORD BOND, ATTORNEY FOR THE 
CHICKASAW NATION. 

Mr. Bond. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, the 
members of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations ow^n an equal un- 
divided interest in the entire tribal moneys and properties. They 
own their moneys and properties in common, therefore they have a 
common cause and a common fight. Mr. Hurley, attorney for the 
Choctaw Tribe of Indians, has so carefully briefed this question 
and has so fully and ably argued the same, that I feel a delicacy in 
attempting to present the issues involved for fear that I may en- 
croach upon the time of the committee by often repeating or pos- 
sibly rearguing questions which have heretofore been fully discussed. 

The bill under consideration provides for the reopening of the 
Choctaw-Chickasaw rolls for claimants under the fourteenth article 
of the treaty of 1830. 

Mr. Carter. Does it not go further than that? Does not the 
Harrison bill provide for the reopening of the rolls to almost anyone? 

Mr. Bond. Yes; practically any person of Choctaw blood who does 
not now appear upon the approved rolls of the tribe could apply as 
a claimant. According to the reports of the commission more 
than 20,000 persons applied as fourteenth-article claimants. 

Mr. Carter. Are you going to discuss the proviso to section 2 or 3 ? 

Mr. Bond. Yes, sir. Section 2 of the bill provides : 

That the Secretary of the Interior shall be vested with the power to deter- 
mine the rights of said claimants upon such evidence as may be produced by 
the applicant, without regard to any adverse judgment or decision heretofore 



4 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

rendered by any court or commission to tlie Five Civilized Tribes or the De- 
partment of the Interior, nnd without regard to any condition or disability 
heretofore imposed by any act of Congress. 

Said section further provides : 

Provided further, That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, 
authorized and directed to enroll, without requiring further application, under 
the provisions of this act, all persons who have been identified as Mississippi 
Choctaws by the Dawes Commission in its report of March tenth, eighteen hun- 
dred and ninety-nine, and commonly known as the McKennan roll ; and also 
all persons who have been identified as Mississippi Choctaws by the Dawes 
Commission from March tenth, eighteen hundred and ninety-nine, to Mnrch 
fourth, nineteen hundred and seven, and were approved by the Secretary of 
the Interior, but whose names do not now appear on the final citizenship rolls 
of the Choctaw-Chickasaw Nation. 

Mark the danger signal. Section 2 attempts to confer authority 
upon the Secretary of the Interior to determine the rights of claim- 
ants without regard to any adverse judgment or decision heretofore 
rendered by any court or commission to the Five Civilized Tribes or 
the Department of the Interior. Mark a further danger signal. 
Section 2 attempts to direct the Secretary of the Interior to place 
upon the approved rolls of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, 
without review and without a hearing of any character, certain 
claimants whose rights have heretofore been denied by a tribunal of 
competent jurisdiction. The alleged claimants, in disregard of the 
restricting and restraining provisions of the Constitution, ask that 
the legislative department of the Government not only exercise its 
powers as a lawmaking body, but ask that said department of the 
Government exercise judicial authority and annul and vacate judg- 
ments. 

I read from Sutherland on Statutory Construction, Volume I, 

page 3 : 

Under the Constitution, the legislature is empowered to make laws; it has 
that power exclusively ; the Executive has the power to carry them by all 
executive acts into effect; and the judiciary has the exclusive power to expound 
them as the law of the land between suitoi's in the administration of justice. 

I read further from page 4 : 

As coordinate branches of one government, they are politically connected 
and bound together; but their powers and functions are not blended; they 
occupy no common ground, nor do they exercise any concurrent jurisdiction. 

I read further from page 5 : 

Any statute which attempts to confer powers or impose duties upon one de- 
partment which properly belong to the others violates the Constitution and is 
Toid. 

I read further from page 12 : 

The whole legislative power delegated to the Federal Government is vested 
in Congress, with the exceptions made in the Constitution, as in the instance of 
making treaties. 

I read further from page 13 : 

The power which is entirely and exclusively vested in the judiciary depart- 
ment is the power conferred on judicial courts and tribunals to administer 
punitive and remedial justice to and between persons subject to or claiming 
rights under the law of the land. * * * It is part of this judicial power 
to determine what the law is, and all questions involving the validity and 
effect of statutes when thus determined are authoritatively settled. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 5 

I read further from page 18 : 

Even rules of action are not valid laws, if, when enacted by the legislature, 
they are judicial in their nature or trench on the jurisdiction and functions 
of the judiciary. The legislature may prescribe rules of decision which will 
govern future cases; these rules will have the force of law, so general rules of 
practice, regulating remedies and so operating as not to take away or impair 
existing rights, may be made applicable to pending as well as subsequent 
actions. But it has no power to administer judicial relief; it can not decide 
cases, nor direct how existing cases or controversies shall be decided by the 
court ; it can not Interfere by subsequent acts with final judgments of the 
courts. It can not set aside, annul, or modify such judgments, nor grant or 
order new trials, nor direct what judgment shall be entered or relief given. 
No declaratory act — that Is, one professing to enact what the law now is or 
was at any past time — can affect any existing rights or controversies. 

The text from which 1 have read is amply supported and sus- 
tained b}^ an unbroken line of authorities, not only from State and 
Federal courts but the Supreme Court of the United States, and the 
text read clearly establishes the fact that 3^011 can not enroll a claim- 
ant without regard to any adverse judgment or decision heretofore 
rendered by any court or commission to the Five Civilized Tribes or 
the Department of the Interior. 

Mr. Carter. Is it your contention, Mr. Bond, that the bill of Mr. 
Harrison recognizes that the cases have been adjudicated by the 
courts? 

]Mr. Bond. Yes, sir ; and it is a well-known and admitted fact that 
practically all these cases have been adjudicated by tribunals of com- 
petent jurisdiction. 

Therefore. -I say, gentlemen, under the authorities read, it would 
be unconstitutional and Congress would not have the authority to 
enforce an act which provides that these claims shall be considered 
without regard to any adverse judgment of any court or any tribunal. 

Mr. Carter. Do you think that would be true in view of the Lone 
Wolf decision and the Cherokee Baby case decision ? 

Mr. BoKi). Yes; that would be true under those decisions. .The 
Lone Wolf decision, if it please the committee, did not attempt to 
annul the judgment of a court. It did not attempt to vacate or set 
aside any finding of any tribunal. It did not attempt to take the 
property of the tribe for the use or benefit of persons who were aliens 
to the tribe. It simply held that Congress had the authority to allot 
the lands of the tribe in severalty and dispose of the surplus. The 
decision in the Cherokee Baby case did not affect a judgment or a 
finding of a court. The Cherokee allotments had not been completed, 
and the Cherokee Council asked that the Cherokee babies be allotted. 

It was the policy of the Government to wind up the affairs of the 
Lone Wolf Band. Therefore Congress provided for the allotment of 
their lands in part and a sale of the balance, and when a part of that 
band of Indians attempted to prevent the allotment and the sale the 
court held that that legislation was within the plenary power of 
Congress; that their rights were not jeopardized or disturbed; that 
they received an equal share of lands in allotment, and received a rea- 
sonable consideration for the lands sold. 

Mr. Carter. The points decided in the Lone Wolf case, as I remem- 
ber, were about these: That an act of Congress had been passed for 
the allotment of the land of the Kiowa and Comanche Indians, 160 
acres per capita, and the sale of the residue. The Kiowa Indians 



6 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TKIBES. 

contended that they had not agreed to have that done and that they 
were not willing to take a 160-acre allotment. Is that 3- our under- 
standing of what the contention was? 

Mr. Bond. That is my understanding. Further, the Lone Wolf 
case is not in point with the issues being considered by the committee, 
for the reason that the}^ were reservation Indians and did not hold 
title by patent. The}^ did not have title in fee simple. 

Mr. Carter. Let me ask you another question, Mr. Bond, about 
the comparative difference between the title of the Kiowas and 
Comanches and the Choctaws and Chickasaw^s, since you have raised 
the point. You did not say quite fully just what kind of title the 
Kiowas and Comanches had. 

Mr. Bond. The Kiowas and the Comanches were a roving band of 
Indians having no fixed place of abode. They were placed on this 
land by the United States and it was given them as a gratuity. 

Mr. Carter. What I am particularly interested in is knowing just 
what the title consisted of. Did they have a patent to the land? 

Mr. Bond. I do not think they had a patent to the land. If they 
did have a patent to the land, it was a gratuity. 

Mr. Carter. There are three kinds of so-called titles to Indian 
reservations : First, there is the Executive-order title, which consists 
mereh^ in this, that a band of Indians is taken up and placed upon a 
reservation by Executive order, W'ithout giving them any other evi- 
dence of title to the reservation: second, you have what might be 
called the treaty reservation, which is a reservation acquired by In- 
dians by treaty, for wdiich they sometimes gave and sometimes did 
not give valuable consideration: third, you have the patent in fee 
reservation, for which not only a treat}' was made and a valuable 
consideration given, but for which an actual patent in fee was exe- 
cuted and delivered to the tribe. For my owm information, because 
my memory does not serve me very accurately about the Kiowas and 
Comanches, I was interested in knowing just what kind of title the 
Kiowas and Comanches had that had been interfered with by acts 
of Congress and which Avere sustained by court decisions, in order 
that this committee might know just how far the power of Congress 
may reach in such matters. 

Mr. Bond. The Lone Wolf Band acquired a right of use and occu- 
pancy under the treaty of Medicine Lodge. I read from the treaty: 

Shall be, and the same is hereby, set apart for the absolute and undisturbed 
use and occupation of the tribes herein named, and for such other friendly 
tribes or individual Indians as. from time to time, tliey may be willing (with 
the consent of the Tnited States) to admit among them. 

Mr. Carter. Now. then, let me ask you this question : In the Lone 
Wolf case and in the Cherokee Baby case, were the plaintiffs the 
authorities of the tribe or were they individuals? 

Mr. Bond. That is a distinction that has very appropriately been 
mentioned at this time. They were not the authorities of the tribe 
in the Cherokee Baby case; they were individuals, and the courts have 
held in an unbroken line of decisions that an individual member of 
a tribe has not such a vested right in tribal property as to maintain 
an action therefor : that the title is in the nation or in the tribe and 
not in the individual. In the Lone Wolf case, it was reported that 
three-fourths of the qualified voters of the tribe favored the allot- 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 7 

ment of the lands of the band, however, it developed thereafter that 
not quite the required number had asked for the allotment. 

Mr. Carter. Was that point discussed in either the Lone Wolf 
case or in the Cherokee Baby case, or do you know ? 

Mr. Bond. It was discussed in the Cherokee Baby case. In that 
case the nation was fighting for the babies and the individuals were 
fighting against their enrollment. 

Mr. Carter. Do you say that the constituted authorities of the 
nation were fighting for the enrollment of the babies, and that the 
Supreme Court decided in line with the contention of the constituted 
authorities of the nation? 

Mr. Bond. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Carter. Now, do you laiow of any court decisions that have 
settled or dealt with the right of Congress to administer tribal 
property in defiance of the constituted authorities of the tribe, or 
of the legally constituted authorities of the tribe ? 

jNIr. Bond. In my judgment, Congress with its plenary power could 
interfere with the legally constituted authorities of the tribes in the 
administration of their afi^airs and in the control of their property. 
But to what extent, would depend entirely upon the circumstances 
and the conditions. If a tribe acquired a right under an act of 
Congress, Congress could not repeal that act and thereby abrogate 
the right. It is a fundamental rule of law that Congress can not de- 
stroy a right acquired under a statute by the power of repeal. There 
are numerous decisions to that effect, and I see no reason why tribes 
should not have rights the same as individuals or corporations. 
There is a marked distinction between administering tribal affairs, 
and taking tribal property and appropriating it to the use of persons 
foreign to the tribe. 

Mr. Carter. Take the present situation as it exists to-day: The 
Choctaws and Chickasaws owned a reservation in Indian Territory; 
they agreed that the property should be allotted to the enrolled mem- 
bers of the tribe, and they agreed, furthermore, that the Federal 
Government should make the rolls. The Federal Government passed 
a law, in accordance with this agreement, closing the rolls as of 
certain date, thereby making operative the rolls that had been made 
for the distribution of the property in accordance w^ith the agree- 
ment that had been made with the tribes. Now, what I Avould like 
to understand is this : 

Has the Federal Government the right now to enroll other mem- 
bers over the objection of the legally constituted tribal authorities, 
who made the agreement, and to place other members on the rolls 
in defiance of the protests of those authorities with whom they had 
made the agreement? 

Mr. Bond. Yes, sir; the statement is clear. Your question will 
cause me, naturally, to divert from the line of my argument, but I 
will answer the chairman's question. I will say this: That the 
claimants in this particular proceeding are claiming imder the treaty 
of 1830. Article II of that treaty'' reads as follows: 

The United States, under a {rrant specially to be made by the President of 
the United States, shall cause to he convoyed to the Choctaw Nation a tract 
of country west of the Missl.ssippi River, in fee simple to them and their 
descendants, to inure to them while they shall exist as a nation and live on it. 



8 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

That provision of the treaty was carried to the patent, and the 
patent reads in part, as follows: 

That the United States of America, in consideration of the premises and In 
execution of tlie agreement and stipulation in the aforesaid treaty, have given 
and granted, and by these patents do give and grant, unto the said Clioctaw 
Nation the aforesaid " tract of country west of the Mississippi," to have and 
to hold the same, with all the rights, privileges, immunities, and appurtenances 
of whatsoever nature thereunto belonging, as intended " to be conveyed " by 
the aforesaid article, " in fee simi)le to them and their descendants, to inure to 
them while they shall exist as a nation and live on it," liable to no transfer 
or alienations, except to the United States or with their consent 

Mr. HiLii. That was the deed or patent made by the Government 
to the tribe? 

Mr. Bond. Yes, sir; to the tribe. I have already shown the com- 
mittee by all the text writers and by an unbroken line of decisions 
that Congress can not annul a judgment, that Congress can not 
grant a new trial, and that Congress can not vacate or set aside a 
finding of a judicial tribunal of competent jurisdiction. The courts 
have determined the rights of the claimants under the patent and 
under the treaty. 

Mr. Ballinger. Right in that connection, Mr. Bond, if it will not 
interrupt you, I would like to ask you a question : Did not Congress 
do precisely that very thing by the act, or supplemental agreement, 
of July 1, 1902, wherein it authorized another tribunal to review the 
judgment of the United States courts which had been declared to be 
a finality by the act of Jime 10, 1898? 

Mr. Bond. I am pleased to have j^ou ask that question. Congress 
can provide for the review of a judgment of a court of its own crea- 
tion, but all the au'thorities make a distinction between annulling a 
judgment and creating a court to review a judgment. There is a 
distinction between granting a new trial and providing for a tribu- 
nal for the review of a judgment. I acknowledge that Congress has 
authority to provide for the review of a judgment rendered by a 
tribimal of its own creation. That is not in conflict with anything 
I have said in my argument, but under this particular bill. Congress 
does not attempt to provide for a tribunal to review particular judg- 
ments against particular claimants, but Congress attempts to abso- 
lutely place them upon the rolls or attempts to direct the Secretary 
of the Interior to place them upon the rolls, absolutely ignoring the 
judgments denying them citizenship. 

]Mr. BALLI^■GER. Right there, in this particular case being dis- 
cussed before the committee, the regularly constituted tribunal had 
found them to be entitled to enrollment, provided only that they 
removed and made proof of their removal. So that judgment of 
their right is to-day in force, and only the question as to their re- 
moval is in issue. Is not that correct? ^ 

]Mr. Bond. I was going to explain that under the terms of the 
patent just read by me. and under the terms of the fourteenth article 
of the treaty, no individual having Choctaw or Chickasaw blood is 
entitled to any right in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations unless 
he lived upon the land and complied with the terms and conditions 
of the patent and the treaty; and the courts have upheld that con- 
tention. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 9 

Mr. Ballinger. Eight there let me ask you another question, 
TN-hich, I think, will entirely clear up the atmosphere. Will you state 
in what decision the court has ever held that removal was a prerequi- 
site to a right? 

Mr. Bond. For your edification I will argue that question for you. 

Mr. Ballinger. If you will cite the decision we can refer to it. 

Mr. Bond. I will read you the decision. You admit, Mr. Bal- 
linger, that the Mississippi Choctaws reside in the State of Missis- 
sippi, do you not? 

Mr. Ballinger. Most of them are there to-day. 

Mr. Bond. You admit that those w^ho reside in the State of Mis- 
sissippi did not remove to the Indian Territory and comply with the 
terms of the patent by living upon the land, do you not? 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Bond, as to compliance with the terms of the 
patent, it has been my contention throughout that that patent to 
which you have referred never conveyed any interest at all, and that 
the interest in the western land had been conveyed by the treaty of 
1820 which did not require any patent. 

Mr. Carter. I think that is aside from the issue, somewhat. But 
the patent was really the eviden("e of the title that was conveyed by 
the treaty, was it not? 

Mr. Ballikger. The patent that was issued under the treaty of 
1830, to which Mr. Bond has made reference, has never been held by 
any court to have been a conveyance even of the legal title, but the 
court has held in the case of the Choctaw Nation against the United 
States that the title to those lands passed to the Choctaw Nation by 
operation of the treaty of 1820. 

Mr. Bond. In order to answer the argument of Mr. Ballinger, I 
will admit that the Supreme Court of the United States did hold 
that those lands were acquired under the treaty of 1820. They were 
acquired under that treaty. The Choctaw Nation exchanged -i.OOO,- 
000 acres of land in the State of Mississippi for the reservation west 
under the treat}^ of 1820, but the patent to the lands involved was 
not issued until 1842. The nation accepted the terms and conditions 
of the patent. If you had contracted for real estate in 1820 and the 
patent or deed was issued in 1842 in compliance with a supplementary 
agreement made in 1830, and you accepted it without objection and 
retained the benefits under it, then you would be bound by its terms. 

Mr. Carter. Let me ask you this : Was the treaty of 1830 made by 
the legally constituted authorities of the Choctaw Nation in INIissis- 
sippi ? 

Mr. Bond. Yes, sir. 

INIr. Carter. And the rights involved in or concluded by that 
treaty were a part and portion of the rights of the Mississippi Choc- 
taws ? 

Mr. Bond. In 1830 the Choctaw Nation resided as a whole east 
of the Mississippi Eiver and the Choctaw Nation as a whole made 
the treaty of 1830. 

Mr. Carter. Then you consider that all the Choctaw Indians then 
belonging to the Choctaw Nation in Mississippi were bound by the 
treaty of 1830 just as strongly as they were by treaty of 1820? 

Mr. Bond. Yes, sir. As a matter of fact, the treaty of 1830 was 
supplementary to the treaty of 1820. and superseded the treaty of 



10 ENEOLLMENT IX THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

1820. Xow, if the chairman please. Mr. Ballinger will say that there 
was no consideration for placing this restriction in the patent that 
the land must be lived upon, but you can find a consideration for plac- 
ing such a restriction in the patent. When the Choctaw Nation 
agreed to go West the United States promised and agreed with said 
nation that no person should have title in and to said lands who did 
not live on same, and that those who remained should not be entitled 
to citizenship unless they removed. 

]Mr. Ballinger ^^ ill say that there was no consideration passing to 
those members Avho expatriated themselves from the nation and 
remained in Mississippi. But, Mr. Chairman, there was a considera- 
tion passing to those members because the nation left for them in 
Mississippi 10,000,000 acres of land, out of which they had the right 
to select 640 acres for each head of a family, 320 acres for each child 
over 10 years of age, and 160 acres for each child under 10 years of 
age. Was this not a sufficient consideration? 

Mr. Ballinger. No. That was nothing more than their share of 
the 10,000,000 acres to which they were entitled. 

Mr. Carter. Were thev entitled to that consideration under the 
treaty of 1820? 

Mr. Ballinger. No, sir. 

Mr. Bond. Under the treaty of 1820 their share of the 10,000,000 
acres of land was not mentioned, and you, ^Vlr. Ballinger, know it 
was not. No allotment scheme was provided for by that treaty, and 
you, Mr. Ballinger, know it to be a fact. 

Mr. Ballinger. Under the treaty of 1820 they reserved in common 
all their rights as members of the tribe in the remaining 10,000,000 
acres of land, and by the treaty of 1830 they were given allotments 
in that 10,000,000 acres, and the allotment was no more than their 
proportionate share would have been had all "the lands been allotted; 
that is. if all of the 10.000.000 acres had been allotted to the then 
members of the tribe. 

Mr. Bond. The Supreme Court held in the case of Fleming v. 
McCurtain et al., reported in 215 United States Reports, at page 56, 
that the title under the treaty of 1830 was in the tribe and that the 
tribe did not hold same in trust for individuals. 

Mr. Carter. Is it your contention that the right of a man to an 
allotment and to get the title to the individual portion of the prop- 
erty which he already owns is not a consideration? 

Mr. Ballinger. I do not think it would be a consideration. 

Mr. Carter. By the same token, then, it might be contended that 
there was no consideration wdiatever in the Atoka or supplemental 
agreement made Avith the Choctaws in Oklahoma. 

Mr. Ballinger. Yes. sir: under those treaties the land in the 
Choctaw Nation was allotted equally among all the members of the 
tribe, or at least provision was there made that when the residue 
lands were sold the proceeds were to be divided equally among all 
those people that were enrolled. 

Mr. Carter. That is going into the details and technicalities, but 
the real consideration that the Choctaws and Chickasaws in the 
Indian Territory received for making the agreements of 1898 and 
1902 was the allotment and division in severalty of that which they 
already owned in common. 

Mr. Ballinger. That is absolutely correct. 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 11 

Mr. Bond. Under the treaty of 1830 there was no provision made 
for allotments save to those who elected to remain and renounce their 
allegiance to the tribe and become citizens of the State of Mississippi. 
Those who went West were not to receive an allotment from the lands 
east, but all land remaining after the allotment of those who re- 
mained was ceded to the United States. 

Mr. Carter. Then, in like manner, it occurs to me it can not be said 
in fairness that the right of the members of the Choctaw Nation in 
Mississippi to individualize what was about his pro rata share of 
land at that time and get title to it was not a consideration. 

Mr. Ballinger. I will make this statement, and then I will not 
ask any more questions, because I do not want to interrupt counsel. 
In 1830 all the Choctaws constituting the Choctaw Tribe owned the 
10,000,000 acres remaining in Mississippi which had not then been 
ceded, as well as all the western lands. By the fourteenth article of 
the treaty of 1830 those Choctaws who remained in Mississippi were 
given allotments out of the 10,000,000 acres of land, which allotments 
were not any more than their individual share of the 10,000,000 acres 
remaining in Mississippi, and there was no consideration, as I claim, 
passed to them for their individual shares in the western lands. 

Mr. Carter. Your statement is fair as far as it goes, but you neg- 
lect to carry it out to its logical end. The further consideration was 
given the Mississippi Choctaws, if the contention of these gentlemen 
be correct, after he had individualized his 640 acres, and so on, to 
his pro rata share in the division of the lands of the Indians in 
Indian Territory at any time that he might choose to move onto those 
lands, so it occurs to me that the man who did receive a consideration 
under the treaty of 1830, and about the only man was the Mississippi 
Choctaw, to wit, the consideration to allot 640 acres to the head of 
a family, and so on down, which was not granted to those Indians 
who moved to Indian Territory. This further statement, which 
has gone into the record, I think, several times, might be appropriate ; 
at that time it was a physical impossibility for any person to derive 
any benefit from the reservation in Indian Territory unless he moved 
upon it. because he could not lease the land for a longer term than 
one year, he could not cultivate it and remain in Mississippi, and 
he could not enjoy any use of that land without actually removing 
to and remaining upon the land. So that in the light of conditions 
as they existed at that time, I repeat, it occurs to me the only con- 
sideration given in the treaty of 1830 was that given to the INIissis- 
sippi Choctaws, which was denied to those who removed to Indian 
Territory. 

Mr. Ballinger. It is true that by the treaty of 1830 provision was 
made that the Indians who remained in Mississippi must remove to 
the western lands, but there was no time limit fixed in which removal 
should occur, and that was left open and indefinite, and it is our con- 
tention that before Congress or the Choctaw Nation could have di- 
vided the western lands and thereby destroyed the rights of the 
Mississippi Choctaws ample and proper notice should have been 
given to the Mississippi Choctaws, which notice was never given. 

Mr. Carter. I understand you now. 

Mr. Phelps. Do you maintain that the granting or the allotting of 
640 acres to the head of a family who remained in Mississippi was a 
consideration for his remaining in Mississippi ? 



12 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr, Carter. I am not yet maintaining anything. I am trying to 
get at the facts. I spoke only of the way the matter occurred to 
me at this time. I do not think that anything was given to him as a 
consideration for his remaining in Mississippi, because at that time 
it was the evident purpose of the Federal Government to move every 
one of them onto the reservation in the West as soon as possible. 

In the decision of Judge Clayton it is set out, and I presume he had 
authority for that statement, that bayonets and soldiers were ready 
to move them to the reservation as soon as it could be conveniently 
done and to restrain them from leaving the reservation after they 
were placed upon it. But the Federal Government at that time was 
confronted with the proposition of not getting any of the Choctaws 
to move West. The treaty had been in force for 10 years and prac- 
tically none of them had gone there. It has been repeatedl}' stated 
that the object in making the treaty with these people was to get as 
many of them as possible to move West; but some of the Choctaws 
would not sign the treaty requiring them to move West. It seems 
to be the general contention that the giving of 640 acres to the heads 
of families and so on down the line was done in order that they might 
get the treaty signed and the Indians moved. 

Mr. Phelps. That leads me to this question: Was it not a fact 
that the Government of the United States found it impossible to 
make that treatj^ with the Choctaw Indians in 1830 up until the time 
that they drafted the fourteenth article ? 

Mr. Carter. I think I stated that very plainly. 

Mr. Phelps. Then the 640 acres did not constitute a consideration 
to remain in Mississippi, and do you contend that it was just simply 
to satisfy those people who refused to move and that there was no 
power in Congress to remove those people? 

Mr. Carter. Again, I am not contending anything, but am simply 
saying how the matter presents itself to me at this time. I wanted 
to bring out a discussion of both sides of the question, and that was 
the animus for my interrogatories. I repeat, it seems apparent that 
the Federal (xovernment did not want the Indians to remain in 
Mississippi, the people in Mississippi did not want them to remain 
there, but they wanted to get a treaty signed by which they could 
start the migration. They were unable to get that treaty signed and 
the Choctaws refused to move. So it seems to be generally conceded 
that the fourteenth article was placed in this 1830 treaty to secure its 
adoption and induce the Choctaws to begin migration to the new 
reservation in the AVest. 

Mr. Phelps. That was the point I wanted to make clear. 

Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Bond, I have just one suggestion and then I 
will not interrupt you. Judge Clayton did render a decision, as you 
stated, holding in effect that removal was essential to a right in the 
western lands. That decision was rendered, as I recall, in the Jack 
Amos case. Judge Townsend, another United States judge, sitting 
in another district in Indian Territory, as I recall, in the consolidated 
^' Mississippi Choctaw cases," held that removal was not essential to 
a right under the treaty of 1830 ; that the Choctaws living in Indian 
Territory held the land for the benefit of the absentees in Mississippi, 
Louisiana, or wherever they might be. So that you have two decisions 
of coordinate courts diametrically opposite, and there has never, 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 13 

SO far as I know, been a decision of a higher court on that particular 
point. 

Mr. BoxD. Mr. Ballinger, it is a very difficult undertaking for a 
man to make an argument in logical sequence and in chronological 
order -without notes, without a written statement, and without a 
brief; and if I am to be continually interrupted during my discus- 
sion of the issues, the argument will be so scattered that the com- 
mittee will be unable to get heads or tails out of my discussion 
when the matter has been closed. I will attempt now to answer one 
or two of your questions, and hereafter I will appreciate it if 3'OU 
will refrain from asking me questions initil I have had an oppor- 
tunity to present my argument to the committee. After I have 
presented my argument I will be pleased then to ansAver any question 
that is relevant or competent. 

Mr. Phelps. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say to Mr. Bond that 
I beg his pardon for interrupting in the course of his argument. It 
was not my intention to do that. The argument had become rather 
informal at that time, and I had no idea of at all confusing Mr. 
Bond. 

Mr. Bond. No; I appreciate that. 

Mr. Carter. I think the Chair can be charged for practically all 
the irregularities that have entered into Mr. Bond's argument. I 
thought it important to bring out clearly any distinction between 
the force that an objection from an individual or band of individuals 
might have as compared to the force of an objection from the legal 
and duly constituted tribal authorities. 

Mr. Bond. I think the Chair left the room shortly after I com- 
menced my argument and did not get the trend of my thought and 
the authorities cited by me. 

Xow, Mr. Ballinger has asked me to site him to some decision 
holding that, under the terms and conditions of the patent issued 
under the treaty of 1830, it was necessary to remove to and establish 
a bona fide residence within the tribal domain in order to acquire 
citizenship and share in the tribal funds and properties. The case 
of Jack Amos against the Choctaw Nation so holds, and I will dis- 
cuss that case fully later on in the hearing. I might also say that I 
have no knowledge of an opinion rendered by Judge Townsend 
wherein the question of removal was involved save an ex parte opin- 
ion entitled " In re Citizenship cases," which will be referred to later. 
The only Plorn citizenship case that I have any knowledge of is the 
E. J. Horn case decided by Judge Clayton, and that case does hold 
as you have stated. 

It will be argued that Congress has authority to pass on applica- 
tions for citizenship and therefore the provisions of the bill in ques- 
tion are within the law, but I assert that there is a marked distinc- 
tion between the title held by the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
under the treaty of 1855 and the title vested in other tribes, a dis- 
tinction that has been recognized by the court of last resort, and 
when Congress contemplated the allotment in severalty of the lands 
of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations it fully realized the danger 
of attempting to divest them of such title by the addition of the 
names of claimants to their rolls without the consent of the tribe; 
hence, Congress agreed with the tribes as to the manner and method 



14 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

of enrollment and the allotment of lands. It was agreed that the 
right to citizcnshi]^ should be determined by a competent tribunal 
empowered to administer oaths and hear testimony, and Congress is 
without authority to annul the judgments of said tribunal and enroll 
without evidence and without a hearing. 

The judicial department has the exclusive power to determine 
what the law is, and the validity and effect of statutes and the rights 
of the claimants can not be determined Avithout passing upon the 
effect of the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830, and without 
passing upon the effect of the patent issued in pursuance thereof; 
and, therefore, I say Congress could not direct the enrollment of 
claimants without encroaching iipon the power of the judicial de- 
partment of the Government. If the moneys and properties of the 
Choctaws and Chickasaws are taken from them by an act of Con- 
gress and sent to an alien people in a foreign State, the act which 
deprives the tribes of their property in violation of the patent and 
the treaty, and in violation of court decisions, should carry with 
it a provision giving the Court of Claims jurisdiction to determine 
the responsibility of the United States for such taking of property. 

The claimants are notoriously insolvent. The tribes are without 
authority to sue the United States unless permission is first granted, 
therefore the force and effect of the treaties and agreements made 
and entered into between the United States and the tribes, in the 
event permission to sue is refused, may be tested in a proceeding to 
enjoin the Secretary of the Interior from paying such moneys; how- 
ever, we would much prefer the right to institute a suit in the Court 
of Claims with the right of appeal to the Supreme Court. We trust, 
however, that there will be no occasion for such a suit, and trust 
that if Congress ever contemplates the taking of tribal moneys un- 
der the conditions and circumstances above named that Congress 
will first submit a test case to the Court of Claims with the right 
of appeal by either party. If, after a full hearing, Congress should 
conclude that the claimants are not entitled to citizenship rights as 
against the Choctaw and ChickasaAv Nations, but should find a set- 
tlement due or equities existing between the Choctaws east and the 
Choctaw Nation west, then Congress should authorize a suit to de- 
termine such equities. You often hear the assertion that the sub- 
committee last session reported in favor of reopening the rolls. I 
have read carefully the report of said committee, and I do not so 
construe the report. I read from said report, at page 27 : 

Mr. Miller. The Choctaws, as a nation, have some money and have valuable 
coal lands. But we must recognize a solemn trenty provision between the Choc- 
taws and the United States. In the treaty of 1902. article 35 begins as follows: 

" 35. No person whose name does not appear upon the rolls prepared as herein 
provided shall be entitled to in any manner participate in the distribution of 
the common property of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes and those whose 
names appear thereon shall participate in the manner set forth in this agree- 
ment." 

Now, I can finish in one or two more sentences. It is a grave question whether 
the Choctaw Nation alone is x'esponsible and should be required to compensate, 
if any body does compensate, these Indians for the injustice. I am not prepared 
to say here what I think about it. but it seems to us that the committee ought to be 
agreed that these Indians are on earth. They have been injured and they ought 
to have some relief, and the committee, then, should say what the relief should 
be, and, as a prerequisite to that, we are agi-eed that we should know who they 
are. how many they are, and where they are. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 15 

The Secretary of the Interior, in writing, states that there are records in his 
office now, or in tlie office of the commissioner to the Five Civilized Tribes, they 
heretofore having received applications for $24,000, and talvcn testimony on them 
covering practically all meritorious cases. They can probably make up a list 
that will include all who have the right and who ought to be included in the 
list of those to whom i-elief should be given. 

Mr. Carter. No doubt that would depend almost entirely upon whom the 
Secretary would refer it to, would it not, Mr. Miller? 

Mr. Miller. I do not know. I will say this to you, Mr. Carter: If this is 
left as it is, the Secretary of the Interior would submit a very small list, and 
the way we have drawn this is not to open it uj), not to let every Tom, Dick, and 
Harry have an investigation, but to take it up and determine where the meri- 
torious case are. 

We are of the opinion that the recommendations of said report were 
practically complied with at this session. The Department of the 
Interior reported the names of applicants who had claims of appar- 
ent merit and such persons were enrolled. The tribes agreed to the 
enrollment as a compromise and to purchase their peace, and yet they 
are still threatened with a practically unrestricted reopening of their 
rolls. It will ever be so until their properties and moneys are ex- 
hausted unless Congress takes a firm stand in the premises. The cases 
of the claimants have been the subject of congressional legislation, 
commission report and decision, judicial decree and determination 
until finally adjudicated, and the members of the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Tribes are entitled to their peace. 

(The committee thereupon took a recess until 2.30 o'clock p. m.) 

AFTER RECESS. , 

Mr. Bond, The proponents of the bill contend that the alleged 
claimants are entitled to citizenship in the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations with all the rights, privileges, and immunities of such without 
removing to and establishing a bona fide residence within tlie con- 
fines of the tribal domain. The opponents of the bill assert that the 
ancestors of the alleged claimants, having renounced their allegiance 
to the tribe, that the alleged claimants having been born without the 
tribe, and having refused to assume the burdens and responsibilities of 
tribal citizenship, and having refused to remove to and establish a bona 
fide residence within the tribal territory, they have forfeited their 
rights to tribal citizenship. The proponents of the bill ask for an 
interpretation of the treaty in conflict with the weight of authority in 
violation of two fundamental rules of statutory construction and 
against the treaties, laws, usages, and customs of the tribe. 

The opponents of the bill ask for an interpretation of the treaty 
in accord with the weight of authority, in harmony with two well- 
established rules of statutory construction, and in keeping with 
the treaties, laws, usages, and customs of the tribe. Principle is the 
very groundwork and foundation of the law; precedent is persuasive 
and often final; and we will establish to your satisfaction, by both 
principle and precedent, that the alleged claimants are without 
legal or equitable right to citizenship in the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Nations. 

Mr. Miller. If I may suggest it, I do not know that it has ever 
been seriously contended, or contended at all, that the so-called Mis- 



16 ENEOLLMENT IX THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

sissippi Choctaws now residing in Mississippi have a legal right to 
be enrolled as members of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. 

Mr. BoM). It is not contended that they have a legal right, but 
it is contended that the}^ have an equitable right, and it is contended 
that they have a political and moral right. 

Mr. MiLLEK. Yes; and I think on those grounds, or somewhere 
on those grounds, they will have to find their justification, because 
it has always seemed to me. and I think that has been the view of 
others, almost without exception, that under the treaties we have 
made in the last half century with the entity, at least, that was 
acting for the Choctaw Nation, the Mississippi Choctaws while 
living in Mississippi had no legal right to membership in the Choc- 
taw and Chickasaw Nations. But the theory upon which, it seems 
to me, they must justify their — I do not want to say citizenship — 
but U]5on which they must justify their right to some redress is 
that they have been despoiled of certain property rights without 
sufficient or adequate remuneration ; and, irrespective of the treaties 
that we have made and the acts of Congress that we have passed, the 
query is whether or not something ought to be done for them. 
I laiow that was the opinion of the sul)committee that investigated 
this matter in the preceding Congress, but I do not think I ever 
heard anybody make a legal argument that under the law as it 
stands the Mississippi Choctaw has a right to be enrolled as a 
member of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. I may be mistaken 
about it. 

Mr. Bond. I intend to argue that the fourteenth article treaty 
claimants or the so-called Mississippi Choctaws have now no legal 
rights under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830, and if it is 
admitted that they have no legal rights under said treaty, then surely 
they are not entitled to citizenship in the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations, for they have no equitable, moral, or political claims against 
the Chickasaw Nation. I desire to argue the legal rights of the four- 
teenth article claimants for the reason that the Chickasaw Tribe of 
Indians in 1837 purchased an interest in the Choctaw tribal lands 
west, and that purchase was subject only to the terms and conditions 
of the treaty of 1830 and not subject to any equities that might have 
arisen theretofore between the Choctaws west and the Choctaws east 
with reference to the disposition of the lands east, for the reason that 
the Chickasaws and Choctaws never owned any property east. ^ The 
Chickasaws were never a party to any litigation affecting the rights 
of the Choctaws east and the Choctaws west to lands in the State of 
Mississippi and received no damages recovered against the United 
States for breaches of the treaty of 1830. Therefore, I contend that 
now with the Choctaws and Chickasaws owning an equal undivided 
interest in the tribal funds, if you give citizenship to fourteenth 
article claimants you not only take property from the Choctaws, but 
you likewise take property from the Chickasaws. Therefore, if there 
exisits any equities, if there exists a political or moral claim between 
the Choctaws west and Choctaws east, that claim should be as- 
serted in a court of proper jurisdiction, under proper safeguards, and 
not asserted in the form of an action for citizenship which would take 
property from both tribes. I have tried to make myself clear. 

Mr. Miller. I understand that perfectly, and it is well taken. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 17 

Mr. Bond. The second article of the treaty of 1830 reads, in part, as 
follows : 

The United States, imder grant specially to be made by the President of the 
United States, shall cause to be conveyed to the Choctaw Nation a tract of 
country west of the Mississippi Kiver, in fee simple to them and their descend- 
ants, to inure to them while they shall exist as a nation and live upon it. 

The patent executed in pursuance of said section of said treaty 
reads, in part, as follows: 

That the United States of America, in consideration of the premises and in 
execution of the agreement and stipulation in the aforesaid treaty, have given 
and granted, and by these presents do give and grant unto said Choctaw Nation 
the aforesaid tract of country west of the ]\Iississii)pi, to have and to hold the 
same, with all the rights, privileges, immunities, and appurtenances of wliatso- 
ever nature thereunto belonging, as intended to be conveyed by the aforesaid 
article, in fee simple to them and their descendants, to inure to them while they 
shall exist as a nation and live on it, liable to no transfer or alienation except to 
the United States or with their consent. 

The third article of said treaty reads, in part, as folloAvs: 

In consideration of the provisions contained in the several articles of this 
treaty, the Choctaw Nation of Indians consent and hereby cede to the United 
States the entire country they own and possess east of the ^Mississippi, and tliey 
agree to remove beyond the Mississippi River as early as pru'ticable. and will 
so arrange their removal that as many as possible of their people, not exceeding 
one-half of the wliole number, shall depart during the falls of 1S30 and 1832, the 
residue to follow during the succeeding fall of 1833. A better opportunity, in 
this manner, will be afforded the Government to extend to them the facilities 
and comforts which it is desirable should be extended in conveying them to their 
new homes. 

The fourteenth article of the treaty provides, in part, as follows : 

Each Choctaw head of a family being desirous to remain and become citizens 
of the States shall be permitted to do so by signifying his intention to the agent 
within six#riionths from the ratification of this treaty, and he or she shall there- 
upon be entitled to a reservation of one section of 640 acres of land, to be 
bounded by sectional lines or survey : in like manner shall be entitled to one- 
half that quantity for each unmarried child who is living with him over 10 
years of age, and a quarter section to such child as may be under 10 years of 
age, to adjoin the location of the parent. If they reside upon said lands, 
intending to become citizens of the States, for five years after tlie ratification 
of this treaty, in that case a grant in fee simple shall issue. Said reservation 
shall include the present home of the head of the family or a portion of it. 
Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw 
citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any portion of the 
Choctaw annuity. 

The first precedent construing the above sections of said treaty is 
found in the case of Jack Amos et al. y. The Choctaw Nation, re- 
ported in the Sixth Annual Report of the Commission to the Five 
Civilized Tribes to the Secretary of the Interior for the fiscal year 
ending June 30, 1899, at page 92. I will read from the opinion of' 
the court : 

In this case the proof shows that the claimants are Choctaw Indians by 
blood now living in the State of Mississippi ; that neither they nor their ances- 
tors have ever removed into the present Choctaw Nation. 

The claimants base their right to be enrolled as Choctaw citizens upon the 
terms of the second and fourteenth articles of the treaty negotiated at Dancing 
Rabbit Creek on September 27, 1830, and of the conditions of the patent to the 
landsof the Choctaw Nation executed by President Tyler in the year 1842. * * * 

The conditions of article 2 of the treaty, that the land should be conveyed 
"to the Choctaw Nation in fee simple to them and their descendants, to Inure 
to them while they shall exist as a nation and live on it," are carried Into the 

80223—15 2 



18 ENROLLMENT IN THE TIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES, 

pntent .-ind are the only poi'tions of that instrument wliich shod any light on the 
question now beinc; considered, and therefore article 2 and the conditions of the 
patent may be considered tojretlier. * * * 

Article S of tlie trenty of 1S30 stipulates that the Choctaws agree to remove 
all of their people during the years 1831. 3832, and 1833 to those lands. 

Article M of the treaty. Iiowever. provides for cert;iin privileges and rights 
for tliose who might choose to remain in Mississippi with a view of becoming 
citizens of that Stiite. They and their descendants were to receive certain 
lands and. after living on them for five years, intending to become citizens of the 
State, those lands were to be granted to them in fee simple. Then follows this 
very peculiar clause: 

" Persons who claim under tliis article shall not lose the privilege of a Choc- 
taw citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any portion of the 
Choctaw annuity." 

The difficulty in construing this clause of the treaty is to ascertain the mean- 
ing of the word " remove." To what does it relate, and how shall we give it 
meaning? It certainly does not purpose to impose a penalty on the Choctaw 
who may choose to remove for removing, and for that reason forfeit his right to 
the annuity, because so long as he remained in Mississippi he was not entitled 
to any annuity, and therefore by removing he could not forfeit that which he 
did not have. If he removed he was to have no annuity, and if he remained he 
was to have no annuity. It is evident, therefore, that the word was not used 
for the purpose of forfeiting the annuity in case of removal. Then what are its 
uses? The very object of the treaty was to procure a removal of these people. 
The whole of the Cho'-taw Nation, with all of its sovereignty, its ]iowers, and its 
duties, was to be transferred beyond the Mississippi. It was to exercise its 
powers, confer its privileges, and maintain the citizenship of its people in an- 
other place. Those who were left behind were to retain, not this Choctaw citi- 
zenship but only the " privileges of a Choctaw citizen " ; that is, that when they 
put themselves into a position that these privileges could be conferred upon 
them they were to have them, and under the conditions and purposes of tliis 
treaty, how would it be possible for them to put themselves in such a position 
without first removing within the territorial jurisdiction of the Choctaw Na- 
tion and withii! tbe sphere of its powers;? Wh.it privilege would it be possible 
for the Choctaw Nation to confer or a Mississippi Choctaw to receive so long as 
he remained in Mississippi and out of the limits of the Choctaw Nation? 

By the very terms of the treaty they were to become citizens of another State, 
owing allegiance to and receiving protection from another sovereignty. If one 
Mississippi Choctaw were to commit a wrong against the person or property of 
another, the right would be enforced and the wrong redressed under the laws 
of Mississippi. The Choctaw Nation would be powerless to act in such a case. 
The Choctaws in that State can not vote, sit as jurors, or hold office as a Choc- 
taw citizen, or receive any other benefit or privilege as such. They can not 
participate in the rents and profits of the lands of the Choctaw Nation, because 
by the very terms of the grant the Choctaw people and ttieir descendants must 
live upon them. If they do not, it is an act of forfeittire, made so by the pro- 
visions of article 2 of the treaty of 1830, and also of those of the patent to their 
lands afterwards executed. 

The title of the Choctaw people to their lands is a conditional one, and one of 
the conditions of the grant, expressed in both the second article of tlie treaty 
of 1830 and the patent, is that the grantees shall live upon them. And who are 
the grantees? Who are these people who are to live upon the land? Unques- 
tionably the Choctaw people and their descendants; for, while the grant is to 
the Choctaw Nation, the people seem to be included both as grantees and 
beneficiaries. The language of the treaty is, and it is carried into the patent: 

" The President of the United States shall cause to be conveyed to the Choc- 
taw Nation a tract of country west of the Mississippi River, in fee simple, to 
them and their descendants, to inure to them while they shall exist as a nation 
and live on it." 

The Choctaw Nation is not " them " and can not have " descendants." And 
while it may exercise its sovereignty and its national powers within certain 
defined territorial limits, it can not "live on land." Those jirovisions of the 
grant which are expressed in tlie plural and attach to "descendants" and which 
require as a condition that the land shall be lived on beyond doubt refer to the 
Choctaw people and their descendants. ♦ * * There can be no question but 
that the second article of the treaty of 1830. negotiated 12 years before the 
execution of the patent, * * * was intended to convey a fee-simple title, 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TKIBES. 19 

burdened by two conditions subsequent, tbe one that the grantees should con- 
tinue the corporate existence of their nation, and the other that the people of 
that nation and their descendants should forever live upon the land. A failure 
of either would work a forfeiture of the title to the grantor. * * * 

This condition was inserted for two reasons : First, to compel the grantees to 
remove upon the lands; and, second, to compel them to remain on them after re- 
moval. It was not intended that some should go and locate on the lands and 
hold the title for themselves and also for the others who should choose to re- 
main. * * * 

The word " successors " was omitted from the treaty, because by its terms 
the Choctaw Nation was to have no successors. They were to live on the land 
forever or it should be forfeited to the grantor. When the technical words 
" successors " and " heirs " were dropped and the common word " descendants " 
was used, these Indians could understand it. They knew what they and their 
offspring were. It was to them — the people and their children — that the land 
was sold, and when the condition was added that the grant was to be made 
to them and their descendants only in the event that they should live upon the 
lands, they could not but understand that this implied a removal and a con- 
tinual residence upon them. 

Mr. Miller. May I ask yon a question on a point that I would 
like to have you elucidate fully? In the early part of the court's 
opinion it is stated that the Choctaws remaining in Mississippi had 
no annuities. Therefore by removing west they lost none. What 
have you to say as to whether or not that is a correct statement of 
the fact? 

Mr. Bond. That is a correct statement of the fact, because the 
Government paid no annuities to the Choctaws who remained, ex- 
patriated themselves from the tribe, and became citizens of the 
State of Mississippi. 

Mr. Miller. Are you quite sure about that? 

Mr. Bond. I am quite sure about that, for the reason that the an- 
nuities promised under that treaty were afterwards recovered in 
an action wherein the Choctaw Nation was plaintiff and the United 
States was defendant, and the annuities were distributed in the 
Choctaw Nation West, and the Choctaws who remained in Mississippi 
under the fourteenth article of the treaty received no annuities pro- 
vided for under the treaty of 1830. 

Mr. Miller. Is that what the language of that opinion says? 

Mr. Bond. The annuities provided for in the treaty were for the 
nation. Those annuities were to assist the nation who went west 
to endure privations and hardships in their effort to conquer a wilder- 
ness and establish homes in a new country. 

Mr. Miller. Can you state what those annuities consisted in? 

Mr. Bond. They consisted of $20,000 a year for 20 years. 

Mr. Miller. I made some special ehort to ascertain that phase of 
the case some time ago, and the results were not entirely satisfactory. 
I thought that possibly you had some additional information. 

Of course, tliat construction of the court is not at all the language 
of the treaty. Nobody could claim that was so. If there were 40 
decisions like that nobody would read the terms of the treaty and 
read the opinion and say that that was a correct statement of what 
the treaty provided. Now, it may be that a subsequent action on 
the part of both the Choctaws and the United States relieved the 
United States of its obligations and changed the rights of the Choc- 
taws. However, I do not think that is fundamental or a determining 
factor in tliis controversy, but I have never been able to understand 
why the court used that language. The language clearly says that 



20 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

if they removed west they would lose their right to annuities. Of 
course, if you and I used that language between us we could only 
mean that if they wanted the annuities they should stay in Mis- 
sissippi. 

Mr. Bond. You must construe the treaty as a whole, and the treaty 
does not offer annuities to anyone except members of the nation, 
and naturally when those who remained alienated themselves from 
the tribe and became citizens of the Commonwealth of Mississippi 
they were no longer members of the nation. 

Mr. Miller. Then you take the position that those who remained 
in Mississippi by that act severed their relationship with the tribe? 

Mr. Bond. They severed their relationship with the tribe, with 
the retention of a privilege. They reserved a privilege to remove 
to the nation west, to renoimce their allegiance to the Commonwealth 
of Mississippi, reaffirm it to the tribe, and thereby enjoy all the 
rights, privileges, and immunities of tribal citizenship save to share 
in the annuities. , 

Mr. Miller. Do you think that is what the Choctaws understood 
the language to mean when they had the fourteenth article Avritten ? 

Mr. Bond. That was evidently what the Choctaws understood the 
language to mean, because the annuities were paid to the nation, 
and the annuities were not paid to the individuals who remained, 
and the individuals who remained never claimed a right to the 
annuities. Therefore the nation and the individuals must have un- 
derstood the treaty as it was construed by the Government authori- 
ties who paid the annuities and as construed by the courts and the 
commission at a later date. 

Mr. Miller. I just wanted to get your ideas on that. As I said 
before, I do not think it is fundamental as affecting the rights of 
the parties at all. 

Mr. Bond. You were evidently confused in attempting to ascer- 
tain what tribal annuities were. A great many people take the po- 
sition that any tribal funds that are paid out to the tribe are tribal 
annuities. 

Mr. Miller. No ; I do not think that. I put the query squarely to 
the department to inform us, if it could, what annuities were re- 
ferred to and what they consisted of. Of course, all we had was 
their reply, and the subsequent course of events we know. They are 
of i-ecord. 

IVfr. Carter. Mr. Bond, what article of the treaty is it that pro- 
vides this annuity of $20,000? 

]Mr. Bond. Article IT provides for the annuities. I will read same 
in full: 

Akt. XVII. The several annuities and sums secured under former treaties to 
the Choctaw Nation and people shall continue as though this treaty had never 
been made. 

And it is further agreed that the United States in addition will pay the sum 
of twenty thousand dollars for twenty years, commencing after their removal to 
the West, of which, in the first year after removal, ten thousand dollars shall 
be divided and arranged to sucli as may not receive reservations under this 
treaty. 

The terms of the seventeenth article show that the annuity of 
$20,000 was not to be p>aid until after their removal west, and that 
same was not to be paid to those receiving reservations under the 
treaty. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 21 

Recading further from the opinion of Judge Clayton- 



Mr. Miller. It seems to me I recall that there was due them under 
the former treaty a very small payment in addition to this $20,000 
a year that is provided for in this treaty. 

Mr. Bond. In practically all the early treaties a provision was 
made for annuities, and the several annuities and sums secured under 
former treaties were continued under the terms of this treaty, but, 
as a rule, the annuities under former treaties were very small. I 
take it that a large annuity was paid the nation west, as before sug- 
gested, on account of its going into a new country. It was unset- 
tled, uncultivated, and uncivilized. 

Mr. Miller. But have you ever contemplated — if there was a 
small annual payment in the w^ay of annuities due — that while these 
who would go West would have a large acreage at their disposal, 
those who remained would have that which is specified in the 
treaty; but as an additional aid to those who remained in Missis- 
sippi, to aid them in building homes, perhaps, not having any addi- 
tional aid such as the others would get who removed, they were to 
receive the annuities? 

Mr. Bond. Mr. Miller, the people who remained, or their ances- 
tors, had been living in practically the same section since De Soto 
discovered the Mississippi Kiver. In fact, I think they should have 
had title to that land by the right of possession, because they did 
not roam and move about as other tribes did. History places them 
in the same locality. They were not only found there under the 
Spanish, but under the French, and later when those possessions 
passed to us. And, therefore, they had homes, they had lands in 
cultivation, they were in a better position to earn a livelihood for 
themselves and for their families than a people would who were 
going into an absolute wilderness and attempting to reclaim it. 

Mr, Miller. Then the position you take is that the annuities 
referred to were to be paid to the Indians who moved West; and 
that those who first remained in Mississippi and did not go West 
with the main body, if they subsequently removed they would then 
become citizens of the Choctaw Nation west, but would not par- 
ticipate in any distribution of annuities to the Choctaws west? 

Mr. Bond. That is my contention. But I will say this, that those 
who did go West, I think, participated in the annuities, so far as 
my knowledge goes, the same as any other member of the tribe. 

Mr. Carter. You mean those that aftei-Avards moved West? 

Mr. Bond. Yes; those who afterwards moved West. 

Let me leave this thought with you. If the annuity you speak 
of should have been paid, as you seem to suggest, to the Choctaws 
east as well as the Choctaws west, but was not so paid, that fact 
would not entitle the ChoctaAvs to citizenship in the Choctaw Xation. 

Mr. Miller. I agree with you on that absolutely. 

Mr. Bond. But it might entitle them to a suit for the annuities 
they were deprived of, with interest since the date they became due, 

Mr. jSIillep.. I agree with you absolutely. That is the reason I 
said I did not think it was a determining factor in the query whether 
or not the jNIississippi Choctaws were entitled to citizenship in the 
nation west. 



22 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Mr. Richardson. Will 3'ou in your argument consider the word 
"lose" in that fourteenth article: whether that is not inconsistent 
with your idea of the right reserved to them? 

Mn Bond. Yes; Mr. Kichardson, I have considered the Avord 
" lose " carefully. If you will permit me to finish reading the parts 
of this opinion that I desire to present I will then take up the word 
"lose" and argue same for you. 

Eeading further from the opinion: 

TV'heu the fourteenth nrticle of the treaty was framed, the uegotiatiug par- 
ties understood that the policy of the United States was that the Choctaws 
wei*e to be removed. The Choctaws, in article 3, had just agreed that they 
should all go. The ink was not yet dry in article 2, whereby the condition 
was placed in this grant to the lands that they were to live upon them or they 
should be forfeited, and that no privilege of citizenship could be conferred or 
enjoyed outside of the territorial jurisdiction of their newly located nation. 
Understanding these conditions the latter clause of article 14 was penned: 

" Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choc- 
taw citizen, but, if they ever remove (that is, if they ever place themselves 
on the land and within the jurisdiction of the nation whereby those privileges 
may become opei'ative), are not to be entitled to any portion of the Choctaw 
annuity." 

In other words, if they ever remove, they are to enjoy all of the privileges 
of a Choctaw citizen except that of participating in their annuities. If this 
be not the meaning to be attached to the word " remove" as used in the clause 
of the treaty under consideration, it must be meaningless. But in the inter- 
pretation of statutes it is the duty of the court to so interpret them as to give 
to every word a meaning, and, in doing so, it must take into consideration the 
whole statute, its objects and purposes, the rights which are intended to be 
enforced and the evils intended to be remedied ; it may go to the history of 
the transaction about which the legislation is had and call to its aid all legiti- 
mate facts proven or of which the courts will take judicial notice in order to 
find the true meaning of the word as used in the statute. 

Of course the same rule of interpretation applies to treatios. Adopting these 
rules in the interpretation of article 14 of the treaty of 1830, I arrive at the 
conclusion that the " privilege of a Choctaw citizen " therein reserved to those 
Choctaws who shall remain, thereby separating themselves, it may be forever, 
from their brethren and their nation, becoming citizens of another sovereignty 
and aliens of their own. situated so that it would be impossit)le, while in Mis- 
sissippi, to receive or enjoy any of the rights of Choctaw citizenship, was the 
right to renounce his allegiance to tlie Commonwealth of Mississippi, move 
upon the lands conveyed to him and his people, and there, the only spot on 
earth where he could do so, renew his relations with his i>eople and enjoy all 
of the privileges of a Choctaw citizen except to participate in the annuities. 
******* 

To permit men with, perchance, but a strain of Choctaw blood in their 
veins who. 65 years ago. broke away from their kindred and their nation and 
during that time, or the most of it.' had been exercising the rights of citizen- 
ship and doing homage to the sovei-eignty of another nation, who have borne 
none of the burdens of this nation, and have become strangei's to the people, 
to reach forth their hands from their distant and alien home and lay hold of 
a part of the public domain, the connnon ])roperty of the people, and appro- 
priate it to their own use, would be unjust and inequitable. 

It is, therefore, the opinion of the court that absent Mississippi Choctaws 
are not entitled to be enrolled as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Miller. Now. can you state the further history of that case, 
so as to get it all together in the record ? 

Mr. Bond. After the rendition of that judgment it was still con- 
tended that the claimant under the fourteenth article of the treaty 
was entitled to citizenship in the Choctaw Nation without removal. 
The act of 1800 provided that— 

If the tribe or any person be aggrieved with the decision of the tribal au- 
thorities or the commission provided for in this act, it or he may appeal 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 23 

from sucli decision to the United States District Court: Procidcd, however. 
That the appeal shall he taken within sixty days, and the judgment of the 
court shall be final. 

In the face of this act it ^vas impossible to appeal, since tiie act of 
189G made the judg-ment of the United States court final. 

Thereafter, in 1898, Congress passed an act, in part, as follows: 

Appeals shall be allowed from the United States Court in the Indian Ter- 
ritory direct to the Supreme Court of the United States to either party in all 
citij^nshiji cases and in all cases between either of the Five Civilized Tribes 
and the Ignited States involving the constitutionality or validity of any legis- 
lation affecting citizenship or the allotment of lauds in the Indian Territory, 
under the rules and regulations governing appeals to said court in other cases. 

Under the provisions of that act the Jack Amos case was appealed 
to the Supreme Court of the United States. Pending the appeal of 
said case to the Supreme Court, numerous other cases involving 
questions of citizenship in various different tribes were appealed; 
and the court having rendered a decision in some of said cases hold- 
ing that the constitutionality and validity of the act was the only 
thing submitted to the jurisdiction of the court, and that the court 
was without jurisdiction to pass upon any other matters, a great 
number of such cases were dismissed, among them being the Jack 
Amos case. 

Mr. Miller. So that the Jack Amos case was never reviewed by 
the Supreme Court? 

Mr. Bond. *No. 

Mr. Miller. That is, as to its merits. 

Mr. Carter. It w^as dismissed on the motion of the attorneys for 
the Mississippi Choctaws. 

Mr. Ballikger. And before the decision in the Stephens case was 
rendered. 

Mr. Bond. I will say, further, that this judgment is now final, and 
conclusive, so far as rights to citizenship of fourteenth- article claim- 
ants are concerned, who failed to remove, and the Chickasaw Tribe 
of Indians, having purchased subject to that treaty, and the courts 
having construed that treaty, the Chickasaw Tribe of Indians are 
entitled to insist upon removal before their funds shall be disposed of. 
to claimants or applicants for citizenship. Congress is without au- 
thority now to pass an act providing for the enrollment of those 
who do not remove unless Congress would first provide for a re- 
view of the Jack Amos case in a court of competent jurisdiction, 
and that court w^ould necessarily have to reverse the Clayton de- 
cision before Congress would be warranted in opening the rolls for 
citizens wdio had not removed to the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Balltnger. Mr. Bond, if that decision was conclusive as to 
the rights of the Mississippi ChoctaAvs, whose cases were before 
Judge Clayton, wdiat have you got to say al)out Judge Townsend's 
decision, in which he held just the reverse of Judge Clayton, in the 
case entitled " In re Citizenship cases," decided by him ? 

Mr. Bond. I have one question to answer for Mr. Richardson, and 
I would like to dispose of it at this time, but before I have finished 
my ai'gument, I will take up the Townsend decision and analyze 
and discuss it carefully. Now, Mr. Richardson, you asked me what 
construction I would put on the word "lose" appearing in the 
fourteenth article of the treaty. Under the rules of statutory con- 



24 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

stniction, treaties must be construed as a whole. The second article 
of the treaty provides in fee simple to them and their descendants, 
to inure to them while they shall exist as a nation and live upon it. 
You will admit that under the language of the second article of the 
treaty, there was imposed upon the members of the tribe a duty to 
live upon the land conveyed by a patent Avhich was subsequently 
issued and which contained the same language. 

Now, you must construe every other article of that treaty, if 
possible, so as not to conflict with or destroy Article II of the treaty ; 
and when you construe the language, persons ^vho claim under this 
article *' shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw citizen, but if they 
ever remove, are not entitled to any portion of the Choctaw annuity," 
you must construe that article so as not to conflict with Article II, 
and when you do, you are irresistably drawn to the conclusion that 
that privilege which they shall not lose will not avail them anything 
unless they remove, because Article II says they must remove. In 
other words, they must live upon the land w^hich would necessitate 
removal. Then, when the word " remo^ e " is used in connection with 
the privilege which they shall not lose and in order to make it har- 
monize and accord with section 2, it necessaril}'- follows that they 
must remove in order to enjoy that privilege, and in order to fulfill 
the terms and conditions of the patent and of Article II. 

Another thought: You can not treat as redundant and reject as 
surplusage words that may be given a meaning in a treaty. What 
are you going to do with the words " if they ever remove " ? Let 
us read that language and leave out the words " if they ever remove " : 

Persons who clnim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw 
citizen, but are not entitled to any portion of the Choctaw annuity. 

The reading of that language with those words left out says 
that they shall not lose the privilege. It says they shall not have 
any annuity, and therefore the words " if they ever remove " are 
treated as surplusage and redundant, and when you treat them as 
surplusage and redimdant in the face of Article 11, which says they 
must live upon the land, and in the face of the patent which says 
they must live upon the land, you violate a fundamental rule of 
statutory construction. 

Mr. Miller. What have you to say to this : A man claiming under 
Article XIV of the treaty, received 640 acres of land. He had three 
children over 10; they each received 320; that would be 960 plus 
630, 1,600 acres of land. They all lived on it five years, and received 
a patent for it. then immediately removed to the Choctaw Nation 
West and claimed property rights in the tribe west. Could he do 
that? 

Mr. Bond. He could do that ; yes, sir. 

Mr. Miller. What w^ould be the reason for giving him such rights 
as that? 

Mr. Bond. The reason for giving him such rights and privileges 
and the right to benefits far in excess of those accorded to other 
members or individuals was the anxiety of the Government to re- 
move those people from the State of Mississippi to lands west. The 
Government, in order to accomplish its purpose, afforded the party 
who was entitled to the lands mentioned by you no protection what- 
ever in the way of restrictions. His lands were alienable ; they could 
be sold after the required residence, disposed of, alienated; no re- 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 25 

striction on alienation was imposed, and it had been the policy of 
the Government practically from time immemorial not to allot 
Indians without placing certain restrictions on alienation, and there- 
fore, I say, the object of the Government was to remove those people 
West. \Vhen the Government found that they would have to move 
them at the point of the bayonet, as some of the records show, 
it then sought other means to enter into a treaty, and used 
sophistry and ingenuity and offered in the end land to those who 
remained, with the privilege of removal and placed no restrictions 
on the land, hoping that they would, when the five-year limit had 
expired, sell same and leave the State of Mississippi and remove 
West. 

Mr. Miller. Do you not think they may also have had in mind the 
Indians who moved west would never own in severalty any of the 
lands given to them there : simply be owned by the tribe as an entity, 
and they would have the right to give up and use it in common '( 

Mr. Bond. Well, that's rather a difficult question to answer; it's 
hard to anticipate what those who made that treaty and negotiated 
it had in their minds for the future. It was evidently their intention 
that those lands would be held as community lands for a number of 
years. 

Mr. Miller. Well? 

Mr. Bond, But surely 



Mr. Miller. The treaty says " always." 

Mr. Bond. Congress contemplated some time that Indian govern- 
ments in the United States should cease; that some time all Terri- 
tories should become States of the Union. 

Mr. Miller. Don't think it was, then, Mr. Bond. 

Mr. Bond. Why, it was only 3() years after the adoption of the 
treaty of 1830 until the treaty of 1860 vras made, which provided for 
an allotment of these lands in severalty. 

Mr. Miller, Well, the only reason for my inquiry was to develop 
the possibility that the annuities referred to would be the thing, and 
all payments by the United States to the Indians, west, and very 
likely any funds going into the hands of the Unite<l States arising 
from a sale or segregation or disposition of the lands west would be 
paid to them. 

Mr, Bond. I might say further that the individuals who remained 
east under the fourteenth article of the treaty never asserted or at- 
tempted to assert any claim to any of the moneys for any of the 
sales of any of the lands west. Only seven years after the treaty of 
1830 was ratified, under the treaty of 1837, the Chickasaws purchased 
an interest in the Choctaw country west for a consideration of 
$550,000, No part of that money was claimed by those who remained 
east, and no claim has been asserted to this day for any of the pro- 
ceeds of that sale. A portion of the lands west were ceded absolutely 
to the Ciovernment without a valuable consideration, but what con- 
sideration was received for the lands ceded west the Indians east 
never asserted a claim to and haven't to this day; but if they have 
any claim to the moneys derived from those lands it couldn't be 
reached in an action for citizenship in the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Tribes, but it should be by an action in law or at equity for the 
specific amounts that they were entitled to, with interest from the 
date of the cession. 



26 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. Carter. I think a reasonable view that might — a resonable 
construction or view, you might say, on that might be phiced upon 
what was in the minds of the people wiio made the treaty of 1830, 
with reference to an}^ future allotments granted in severalty in the 
western reservation — might be that the Indians at that time had no 
idea that they would ever be called upon to allot those lands, and 
that the white man knew ver}' well that they would not be called upon 
in the future, but kept that fact studiously from the Indians until 
he got the treaty signed. 

Mr. Miller. Have you the treaty between the Chickasaws and 
Choctaws by which they purchased their interest? 

Mr. Bond. Yes. 

Mr. Miller. I have really never seen that; I hope to put that in 
the record. 

Mr. Bond. I will put it in the record now, if 3'ou like. 

Mr. Miller. It does not make any differene when. 

Mr. Carter. Suppose we put it in as an exhibit ? 

Mr. Bond. At this point ? 

Mr. Carter. Suppose we take those things that are not directly 
involved and put them in the back part of the record as an ad- 
denda ? 

Mr. Miller. That will be all right. 

Mr. Bond. I will offer it later. In support of the argument I 
have just made, in reference to the construction of the last clause of 
the fourteenth article of the treaty, I desire to read from Sutherland 
on Statutory Construction, Volume II, second edition, at page 731: 

It is an elementary rule of construction that effect must be given, if possible, 
to every woi'd, clause, and sentence of a statute. Statutes should be so con- 
strued that effect may be given to all of their provisions, so that no part will 
be inoperative or superfluous, void, or insignificant, and so that one section will 
not destroy another. 

If you construe the last clause of article 14 to mean that the four- 
teenth-article claimant is entitled to citizenship rights without re- 
moval, you absolutely destroy the language of the patent, and you 
absolutely destroy article 2 of the treaty, because they both pro- 
vide that claimants must liA-e upon the land. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Bond, was not the reason that that provision 
was put in article 2, as well as in the patent, the fact that Congress, 
in the spring of 1830, had passed an act relating to the giving of 
deeds and making treaties for Indian lands in which they had 
required that provision to be inserted, and in other treaties wherej 
that same clause was put in, the proviso was that the tribe — the 
nation or tribe — as such was the only tribe who held down that title 
by possession, and not the individual? 

Mr. Bond. I do not know what the legislators had in mind when 
they placed that provision in the treaty, but the provision is there, 
and that provision was carried into the patent, and even if the pro- 
vision did not appear in the treaty and did appear in the patent they 
would be botmd by the terms of the patent, because they accepted 
the benefits under the patent and they must assume the burdens. 

Now. I would like to devote some time to distinguishing cases that 
have been cited by counsel for proponents at this hearing and at other 
hearings before I was employed to represent the Chickasaw Tribe of 
Indians. I desire to call the attention of the committee to the case 



ENKOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 27 

of Oaks et al. v. United States, reported in 172 Federal, at page 305. 
This decision was cited by Mr. Cantwell, of counsel for proponents, 
and referred to by him as a very illuminating decision. I think it 
is very illuminating in its marked distinction from the issues before 
the committee, and I am very much pleased, indeed, that Mr. Miller 
is a member of this committee, because Mr. Miller was of counsel in 
this case and \vill readily see the marked distinction. Mr. Cantwell 
contends that under this decision all Indians throughout the United 
States are entitled to citizenship in their respective tribes, nations, 
or bands without removing to and establishing a residence in their 
nations, tribes, or reservations prior to allotment. I read from the 
syllabus, first section : 

Originally the test of the right of individual Indians to share in tribal lands 
and other tribal property was existing membership in the tribe, but this rule 
has been so broadened by the act of March 3, 1875, and the act of February 8, 
1SS7. and other acts as to place individual Indians who have abandoned 
tribal relations once existing and have adopted the customs, habits, and man- 
ners of civilized living upon the same footing in respect of this right as though 
they had maintained tribal relations. 

Now, if it please the committee, those acts referred to are acts ap- 
plicable to reservation Indians, and an examination of the Federal 
statutes will show that Congress in passing those acts prefaced same, 
showing the applicability of the statute and showing that they were 
applicable to reservation Indians. In determining the rights of citi- 
zenship you must look to the law of the particular tribe in question. 
If you desired to determine the rights of citizenship of a subject of 
the Czar of Russia you would look to the laws of Russia. If you 
desired to determine the rights of citizenship of a subject of the 
Emperor of Germany you would look to the laws of Germany. So 
if you desire to ascertain the rights of citizenship of a Choctaw citi- 
zen you must look to the laws applicable to the Choctaw Tribe of 
Indians. The acts of 1875 and 18S7 are not applicable to the Five 
Civilized Tribes. Congress has always legislated s]oecifically with 
reference to said tribes. The courts have never construed any of the 
acts at large as applicable to the FiA^e Civilized Tribes. 

And I desire further to make this distinction, and Mr. Miller will 
no doubt recall it to his mind after it has been made. Even in this 
case the court held that if a party was born without the trilie and 
had never had any tribal affiliation or tribal relations that then he 
would not c(nne witliin the purvieAv of said acts — that he must some 
time have had trilial affiliations— and the claimants here have never 
had ti'ibal affiliations; their ancestors, who renounced allegiance to 
the tribe, are all dead, and the claimants were born without the tribe. 

Another suggestion: The court, in rendering the opinion in the 
Oakes case, stated that you must first look to the allotment act under 
which the Indians are to be allotted, and it looked to the allotment 
act under which this particular band of Indians were" being allotted, 
and it found that the allotment act did not conflict with the stat- 
utes at large, applicable to reservation Indians, and therefore found 
that the statutes Avei'c ajiplirable. If you look to the allotment acts 
of our tribes, you will find that they all contemplate i-esidence. The 
act of 1808 contemplates residence; the act of 1900 says that the four- 
teenth-article claimants must remove; the act of 1902 says that the 
fourteenth-article claimants must remove; so, even if the statutes 



28 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

of 1875 and 1887 had been applicable to the Five Civilized Tribes, 
they would have been repealed by our allotment acts of 1898 and 1900 
and 1902. I will read from a part of the opinion : 

Jane Andrews and Cornelia Van Etten Bent, the remaining appellants, are 
daughters of Mrs. .Jones by her first luisband. They were born and reared in 
St. Paul, never were enrolled or recognized as members of the tribe, and are 
married to white men. After the Oakes family moved to St. Paul, Mrs. Oakes 
and Mrs. Jones abandoned their former tribal relations, adopted the customs, 
habits, and manners of civilized life, and ceased to be recognized as members 
of the tribe; but these visits did not occur often, and were confined to rela- 
tives. The appellants were all residents of St. Paul when the act of 1889 
was passed, and shortly thereafter they asserted that they were entitled to allot- 
ments thereunder. In 1S94 the names of INIrs. Oakes and Mrs. Jones were 
placed upon a .supplemental census of White Earth Mississippi Chippewas by 
the chairman of the commisson charged with making a census and allotments 
under the act of 1889, and the next year their names were dropped from the 
census; but the circumstances in which these acts were done are not disclosed. 
In 1905, before applying for allotments to specific lands, Mrs. Oakes and Mrs. 
Jones removed to and took up their residence upon the White Earth Reserva- 
tion. Whether or not Mrs. Andrews and Mrs. Bent did lilvewise may be left 
undetermined, because, if they did, it would not help them, a-s will be seen pres- 
ently. 

******* 

We conclude that Mrs. Oakes and Mrs. Jones, who formerly were members of 
the tribe, are within the saving provisions of the acts of ^larch 3, 1875, and Feb- 
ruary 8, 1887, and so are entitled to share in the allotment and distribution 
of the tribal property, the same as though they had maintained their tribal 
relations, but that Mrs. Andrews and Mrs. Bent, who never were members of 
the tribe, can not derive any benefit from any of the acts mentioned ; and we 
reach this conclusion with greater satisfaction, because it is in accord with 
rulings of the Secretary of the Interior in cases which are not distinguishable 
from this. * * * 

Citing decisions. 

Another case cited by Mr. Cantwell, of counsel for proponents, as 
supporting the contention that the claimants were entitled to citi- 
zenship without removal, is found in 170 United States, at page 1, 
New York Indians v. United States. This case is not in point with 
the issues in question for the following reasons: The Xew York 
Indians composed several small bands living in different parts of the 
State. A treaty was made with those Indians whereby they ceded to 
the Government certain lands in the State of Wisconsin. The Gov- 
ernment, in lieu of that cession, ceded those bands certain lands in the 
State of Kansas. There was a provision in the treaty that they 
were to live upon the lands in the State of Kansas, but that wasn't 
the sole condition precedent. There were other conditions precedent. 
The President of the United States was required under the treaty 
to notify the various bands when they were to remove and to pro- 
vide for them a method and manner of removal. The Government 
disposed of the lands ceded in Wisconsin and attempted to claim a 
forfeiture of the lands in Kansas, because the New York bands had 
not moved to that State. The court held that the question of citizen- 
ship was not involved, held it was merely a question of whether or 
not there was a forfeiture, and since the Government had failed to 
comply with the condition precedent, it couldn't claim a forfeiture 
on the part of the Indians. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Bond, is that not very much like the claim 
of the identified full bloods whose claim was defeated by the action 
of the Government? 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 2^ 

Mr. Bond. Xo; no analog}^ whatever. The rights of those people 
are absohitely founded on the treaty of 1830. Reading from the 
sylhibus : 

The provision in tlio treaty of June 15, 1838, with the New York Indians that 
the Fnited States v>ill set apart as a permanent home for them the tract therein 
described in wh:'t afterwards became the State of Kansas, was intended to in- 
vest a present legal title thereto in the Indians, which title has not been for- 
feited and has not been reinvested in the United States; and the Indians nre 
not estopped from claiming tlie benefit of such reservation. 

Eeading from the opinion of the court : 

By the third article of the treaty it w;is further agreed that such of the 
tribes of the New York Indians as do not accept and agi'ee to remove to the 
country set apart for their new homes witliin five years, or such other time as 
the President mny from time to time appoint, shall forfeit all interest in the 
lands so set apart to the United States. 

Now, mark yoit, " or such other time as the President may from 
time to time appoint." A distinction is drawn by the authorities be- 
tween the case of a private grantor, who may reenter in the case of a 
breach of a condition subsequent, and the Government, which can 
only possess itself of hinds by legislative or judicial action. It will 
be observed that the forfeiture is conditional, not upon the actual 
removal of the Indians to the Kansas reservation, but upon their 
acceptance and agreeing to removal Avithin five years, or " such other 
time as the President might from time to time appoint." 

The difficult point in the case, in its equitable aspect, is whether the protests 
of the Indians and their final refusal to remove in 1846 do not estop them from> 
claiming the benefit of the reservation made for them. This is the main defense 
in the case. Upon the other hand, no time was fixed by the President for their 
removal : no foriual notice w'as ever given them to remove; but at various times, 
and particularly at tlie council held at Cattaraugus June 2. 1846, called by the 
connnissioners to learn the final wishes of tlie Indians as to emigration, the 
chiefs of the four tribes present were unanimous in the opinion that scarcely 
any Indians who wished to emigrate remained. This action constitutes prac- 
tically the only claim of forfeiture. There is no finding that the other five 
tribes did refuse. The practical application which counsel seek to make of 
this partial refu.sal is to justify the Governmet, not only in appropriating the 
Kansas lands, but, infei-entially, in failing to make any other compensation to 
the Indians for the seizure and sale of the Wisconsin lands. In view of this 
it seems to us that to justify a forfeiture it should appear that the repudiation 
was as formal and broad and as unequivocal as the acceptance; that the Presi- 
dent should have fixed a time for the removal and should at least have made a 
formal tender of performance. 

This was simply a question of forfeiture. No question of citizen- 
ship was involved, and since the President of the United States 
didn't comply with the condition precedent and since five of the 
tribes had never expressed themselves, the court held that there was 
not a forfeiture; and forfeitures are not favored, and besides, the 
Government had received the lands belonging to the New York In- 
dians in the State of Wisconsin in exchange for Kansas lands, and 
the United States couldn't have been damaged by reason of the court 
holding that there Avasn't a forfeiture. 

Mr. Ballingek. Mr. Bond, in that same case did not the question 
arise as to the distribution of the proceeds, and indirectly the ques- 
tion as to citizenship, and did not the court hold that even Indians 
who had gone to Canada and gave up their allegiance to the United 
States were entitled to share in those funds? 



30 ENEOLLMEXT IX THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Mr. Bond. The question of citizenship was not involved, and if 
you will examine the opinion of the court you will so find. The 
court so states. 

And I want to say, further, that in the fourteenth article of the 
treaty of 1830 there is only one condition precedent, that is a con- 
dition that the claimant thereunder should remove in order to enjoy 
the privileges of tribal citizenship. There is no provision for notice 
by the President; there is no provision for notice by the tribe; there 
is no provision whatever as a condition precedent to be performed 
by the tribe or by the United States whereby the fourteenth article 
claimant could say, " Why, you have not performed your condition 
precedent, therefore you can not claim a forfeiture as against me." 
The cases are not analogous; they are not parallel in any respect. 

(The subcommittee took a recess until 10.30 the following morn- 
ing.) 

SuBCOM:sriTTEE OF Committee on Indian Affairs, 

House of Representatives, 

Saturday^ August 15, 191Jf. 
The subcommittee met at 2 o'clock p. m., Hon. Charles D. Carter 
(chairman) presiding. 

STATEMENT OF ME,. REFORD BOND— Continued. 

Mr. Bond. Mr. Chairman, the case of the New York Indians v. 
The United States was originally tried in the Court of Claims, and 
is reported in 18 Court of Claims Reports, at page 448. The Court 
of Claims in rendering the opinion in that case used the following 
language : 

This is not a question of Indian citizenship or tribal custom or couimunal 
ownership in Indian property, but is simply a question of the subject matter 
and purpose of a contract and of the intent of those who entered into it. 

I desire now to distinguish the case of the United States v. The 
Cherokee Nation, reported in 202 United States, at page 101. In 
speaking of the above case Mr. Cantwell, of counsel for proponents, 
used the following language: 

This Eastern Cherokee case in regard to the rights of the Eastern Cherokees 
is analogous to tlie rights that we are contending for to-day. In other words, 
the principle upon wliich they recovered their rights is the same principle upon 
which we ask these rights for the Mississippi Choctaws. except that we think 
our rights are very much more strictly secured by treaties than the rights 
which were securo<l to the Eastern Cherokees. 

That case has no analogy whatever to the issues before the com- 
mittee. It was analogous to the case of the Choctaw Nation v. The 
United States, reported in 119 United States, page 1. The Choc- 
taw Nation in the case mentioned, under a special act of Congress, 
instituted suit in the Court of Claims in its behalf and in behalf of 
individual pers(ms for damages done under the treaty of 1830 and 
for damages arising from other causes. The question of citizenship 
was not involved in the proceeding in any manner Avhatever. The 
case of the Cherokee Nation v. The United States, above referred 
to, was an action brought under a special act of Congress for the 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 31 

purpose of recovering damages for the Cherokee Nation and for 
the eastern bands of Cherokees, by reason of a breach of the treaty 
of New Echota. and for damages for other causes. The act con- 
ferring jurisdiction on the Court of Claims reads, in part, as follows: 

Jurisdiction is hereby conferred upon the Court of Claims to examine, con- 
sider, and adjudicate, with the right of appeal to the Supreme Court of the 
United States by any party in interest feeling aggrieved at the decision of the 
Court of Claims, any claim which the Cherokee Tribe or any band thereof 
arising under treaty stipulations may have against the United States. 

The act further provides: 

And said section shall be further so construed as to require that both the Chero- 
kee Nation and said Eastern Cherokees, so called, shall be made parties to any 
suit which may be instituted against the United States under said section. 

And it further provides: 

If said claim shall be sustained, in whole or in part, the Court of Claims, sub- 
ject to the right of appeal n.imed in said section, shall be authorized to render 
judgment in favor of the rightful claimant, and, also, to determine as between 
the different claimants to whom the judgment so rendered equitably belongs, 
either wholly or in part, and shall be required to determine whether for the 
purpose of proceeding under said claim the Cherokee Indians who remained 
east of the Mississippi River constitute a part of the Cherokee Nation or of the 
Eastern Cherokees, so called, as the case may be. 

A petition was filed on behalf of certain Eastern Cherokees living 
east of the Mississippi asserting their claim to a pro rata share of 
that portion of the removal or subsistence fund improperly taken by 
the United States from a $5,000,000 fund on account of the removal 
of the Eastern Cherokees, the said $5,000,000 fund being an interest- 
bearing fund in the hands of the United States as trustee, and repre- 
senting the money paid by the Government to the Eastern Chero- 
kees from the sale of their lands in North Carolina, Georgia, and 
Tennessee, or east of the Mississippi Eiver. 

Now, if the committee please, the petition in the case, the statement 
of the case by the court, and the entire facts show that the eastern 
bands of Cherokees were not claiming the proceeds from the sale 
of any lands west of the Mississippi Eiver, but were claiming the 
proceeds or funds derived from the sale of lands east of the Missis- 
sippi when the entire tribe resided east of the Mississippi ; and, as a 
matter of fact, at that time both the Eastern and Western Cherokees 
owned the property jointly and naturally would be entitled to share 
jointly in the fimds. It is not in point with the case before the 
committee, because the Eastern Choctaws are attempting to claim 
moneys derived from the sale of lands, not east of the JNIississippi, 
but west of the Mississippi and in the Choctaw Nation, and to which 
they have no right or title. They refused to remove and assume the 
burdens and responsibilities of Choctaw citizenship and elected to 
remain in Mississip])i and elected to receive their share of the estate 
in said Commonwealth. I read from the opinion of the court: 

As to those Cherokees who remained in Georgia and North Carolina, in Ala- 
bama and Tennessee, they owe no allegiance to the Cherokee Nation ;ind the 
nation owes no political protection to them; but they, as the connnunal owners 
of the lands east of the ISIississippi at the time of the treaty of 18.'?.'). were equally 
interested with the connnunal owners who were carried to the west in the 
$5,000,000 fund which was the cousidei'atiou of the cession so far as it was to be 
distributed per capita. 



32 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Beading further from the opinion : 

As to these eastern nonresident Cherokee aliens, the nation acted simply as 
an attorney collecting a debt ; in its hands tlie money would be an implied trust 
for the benefit of the equitable owners. 

There is a case, however, entitled " The Eastern Band of Cherokee 

Indians v. The United States and the Cherokee Nation," which is 

anahigotis to the issues being considered by the committee. That 

case is reported in the One hundred and seventeenth United States, 

page 288. 

1 will now read the committee what Judge Clayton said with ref- 
erence to the case last cited : 

The Eastern Band of Cherokees, now residing in North Carolina, sustained a 
relationship to the Cherokee Nation almost identical to that sustained by the 
Mississiiipi Choetaws to the Choctaw Nation. Like the Mississippi Chuctaws 
there were some ;;mong them who were averse to moving to their new country 
west of the Mississippi Kiver. Provisions were made for them by the treaty 
of New Echota (the treaty of 1S35), between the Cherokee Nation and the 
United States, similar to those with the Choetaws by the treaty of 1830. When 
the Cherokee people moved to the present home of the Cherokees, these re- 
mained behind in North Carolina, where they have ever since resided. Like the 
Choctaw treaty of 1830. the treaty of New Echota provided that their lands 
should bo ceded to them and their descendants, etc. The Cherokee Nation, by 
virtue of a treaty with the United States, afterwards sold some of these lands. 
The Eastern Rand of Cherokees, in North Carolina, unlike their Mississippi 
Choctaw brethren, promptly demanded their pro rata of the proceeds of this sale, 
and, upon being denied, at once sought and obtained permission of the United 
States to sue the Cherokee Nation in the Court of Claims for this money; and 
also, in the same suit, to sue for another fund which was created by the treaty 
of New Echota, consisting of certain annuities in the sum of $214,000, of which 
the Eastern Band of Cherokees claimed a pro rata share. The suit was 
brought, and the Court of Claims, in a very elaborate and learned decision, 
decided against the right of the Eastern Band of Cherokees to recover, upon 
the ground that those Cherokees, by the act of remaining in North Carolina, 
had alienated themselves from the Cherokee Nation to such an extent that they 
could not claim any of the rights of a Cherokee citizen without moving into the 
Cherokee Nation and there being readmitted in accordance with the constitu- 
tion and laws of that nation. 

Judge Claj'^ton was of the opinion that the case last cited was in 
point, and it can clearly be seen that the case first cited is not in 
poiiit. In fact, the two cases do not deal with the same question, and 
the issues involved in each are entirely different; otherwise it would 
have become necessary for the court to have either reversed itself or 
distinguished the cases, one from the other. A marked distinction, 
one of compelling force and decisive of the question, is the fact that 
under the twelfth article of the treaty of 1835 the Cherokees who 
remained east were expressly permitted to share in the communal 
fund above mentioned. In the one case the eastern Cherokees had 
an interest because they were members of the tribe when the lands 
were disposed of, in the other case they had refused to remove and 
had thereby forfeited their right to share in the proceeds from the 
sale of lands west. 

We find in the opinion of the court the following language used : 

Tlieir claim, however, rests upon no solid foundation. The lands from the 
sales of which the proceeds were derived belong to the Cherokee Nation as a 
political body and not to its individual members. They were held, it is true, 
for the common benefit of all the Cherokees, but that (Joes not mean that each 
member had such an interest as a tenant in common that he could claim a 
pro rata proportion of the proceeds of sales made of any part of them. He had 



ENKOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 33" 

a right to use parcels of the lands thus held by the nation subject to such 
rules as its governing authority might prescribe, but that right neither pre- 
vented nor qualified the legal power of that authority to cede the lands and 
the title of the nation to the United States. 

Reading further from the opinion of the court: 

The Cherokees in North Carolina dissolved their connection with their nation 
when they refused to accompany the body of it on its removal, and they have 
had no separate political organizntion since. They have never been recognized 
as a separate nation by the IJnited States. No treaty has been made with them. 
They can pass no laws. They are citizens of that State and bound by its laws. 

Reading further from the opinion of the court : 

The claim now presented by the Cherokees of North Carolina to a share of 
the commuted anniiity fund of .$214,000 and of the fund created by sales of 
lands west of the Mississippi ceded to the Cherokee Nation, resting as it does 
upon the designation in tiie treaties of the lands originally pos.sessed by the 
Cherokees and ceded to the United States or subsequently acquired by them 
from the United Slates, as the common property of the nation or as held for 
the common use and benefit of the Cherokee people, has no substantial founda- 
tion. If Indians in that State or in any other State east of the Mississippi 
wish to en.i'oy the benefits of the common property of the Cherokee Nation, in 
whatever form it may exist, they must, as held by the Court of Claims, comply 
with the constitution and laws of the Cherokee Nation and be readmitted to 
citizenship as there provided. They can not move out of this territory, evade 
the obligations and burdens of citizenship, and at the same time en.ioy the 
benefit of the funds and common property of the nation. This fund and that 
property were dedicated by the constitution of the Cherokees and were 
intended by the treaties with the United States for the benefit of the united 
nation, and not in any respect for those who had separated from it and become 
aliens to their nation. 

If it please the committee, it seems to me that counsel represent- 
ing thousands of claimants, having contracts for fees estimated in 
the millions, evidently gave the subject sufficient consideration to 
ascertain that there were two cases, one reported in 117 United 
States and one reported in 202 United States, involving the rights 
of the Eastern Cherokees, and evidently he had sufficient legal abil- 
ity to know that the case reported in il7 United States was analo- 
gous in many ways to the case before the committee, and to know 
and realize that the case reported in 202 United States is not 
analogous and not parallel to the issues involved before the com- 
mittee. And yet we find counsel citing for the benefit of this com- 
mittee the case reported in 202 United States and remaining as 
silent as a sphinx so far as the case reported in 117 United States 
is concerned. The Choctaw Council passed an act in 1895, which 
act appears in the brief prepared by counsel for the ChoctaAV Na- 
tion, and according to the terms and conditions of that act a limi- 
tation was placed u]:)on the time in which the fourteenth article 
claimants of the treaty of 1830 could remove to the Choctaw Nation 
vrest, establish a residence and claim citizenship. Consider that 
act of the Choctaw Council in connection with the case reported in 
117 T'l^nited States and you have a parallel case in almost every re- 
spect, because that case was decided upon the constitution of the 
Cherokee Nation, which ])rovided that the Ea.stern Cherokees or any 
other members of the Cherokee Nation, in order to have and main- 
tain citizenship in that nation, must reside therein. Counsel for 
proponents of the bill no doul)t will argue that the treaty of New 
Kchota was silent on the question of removal; that the treaty of 
1830 provided that persons who claimed under this article shall 
80223—15 3 



34 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

not lose the privilege of a Choctaw citizen, and will contend that 
therefore there is a marked distinction between the Eastern Chero- 
kee case and the issues involved before this committee. But I say 
to you, gentlemen, that the fourteenth article of the treaty provided 
that in order to enjoy citizenship they must remove and therefore 
we have a stronger case than the case of the Eastern Cherokees, 
where the treaty was silent as to removal. It will be contended 
further by counsel for proponent that we were without authority 
to pass an act of the character above referred to. Our reply to 
that, gentlemen, will be that the courts have held that removal was 
necessary: that there was a limitation in the act of removal which 
limited it to the persons who claimed under that article that the 
Choctaw Tribe of Indians waived that limitation and permitted 
not only the persons but the heirs to come, and therefore the Choc- 
taws had a right to place a limitation upon the coming of the 
heirs on condition that that limitation be reasonable. And we con- 
tend that under all the circumstances and conditions the limitation 
placed by the Choctaw Council was a reasonable limitation. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Bond, do you think that Judge Clayton's 
opinion in the case of E. J. Home, in which he held that the Missis- 
sippi Choctaws could come to Oklahoma at any time before filing 
application under the act of June 10, 1806, was correct or incorrect? 

Mr. Bond. The act of June 10, 1896, reads, in part, as follows: 

That in determining all such applications said commission shall respect all 
laws of the several nations or tribes not inconsistent with the laws of the 
United States and all treaties with either of said nations or tribes, and shall 
give due force and effect to the rules, usages, and customs of each of said 
nations or tribes. 

We contend that under that provision due force and effect should 
have been given to this act of the Choctaw Council unless it con- 
flicted with some treaty provision, as the act also provided that due 
respect shall be given all treaties. The act does not conflict with the 
treaty, because the treaty provided for removal, and the act simply 
fixes* the limitation for removal. And, in our judgment, it could 
have been easily determined and held by a court that the fourteenth 
article claimants were barred by the act of the Choctaw Council. 
However, it appears that this question has never been considered by 
the courts, and the case referred to b}^ you as the Home case does 
not disclose the fact as to whether or not the claimant removed to the 
Choctaw Nation west prior or subsequent to the act of the Choctaw 
Council above referred to. It is very evident that he was a resident 
of the Choctaw Nation west at the time the act of council above 
referred to w^as adopted, as it did not become necessarv for the court 
to consider the act of the Choctaw Council in arriving at a con- 
clusion in the case. 

Mr. Richardson. In that connection, Mr. Bond, let me call your 
attention to this fact: That in the E. J. Home cas6 the question w\as 
raised Avhether the a'ct of the Choctaw Council of November 5, 1886, 
barred him from his enrollment and the court said in its opinion, 
holding that it did not bar him : 

By the fourteenth article of the treaty between the Choctaw Nation and the 
"United States, negotiated on the 27th day of September, 1S30, as interpreted 
by this court in the aforesaid case of Jack Amos et al. v The Choctaw Nation, 
ah Mississippi Choctaws and their descendants were entitled, upon their removal. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 35 

to the Clioctnw N.-ition, to all the privileges of a Choctaw citizen, except to the 
right to participate in their annuities. This right of citizenship being con- 
ferred by the treaty, no law afterwards enacted by the Choctaw Council can 
deprive them of that right, because it would be in contlict with the treaty, 
which confers that right to them and their descendants, without reference to 
the quantity of Indian blood. If they are descendants of Choctaw ancestors, it 
is sufficient. As to them therefore the law does not apply. 

Mr. Bond. In the E. J. Home case the act of the council I refer to 
was not considered. The court considered the act of 1886, and was 
correct in holding: that said act was in conflict with the treaty, be- 
cause it attempted to fix the quantity of blood necessary for citizen- 
ship. The act of 1895 fixed a limit within which fourteenth article 
claimants should remain, and if the time fixed was reasonable the act 
was valid. 

It is true, Mr. Richardson, that no act of the Choctaw Council 
could deprive them of a right acqtiired under the treaty, but the act 
in question did not deprive them of any right. The act in question 
did not attempt to repeal or abrogate any provision of the treaty. 
The act in question simply put in force the statute of limitation and 
started it running. 

I now desire to call the committee's attention to the ex parte 
opinion delivered by Judge Townsend. As a rule, I am opposed 
to arguing ex parte opinions or dissenting opinions, because neither 
have very much weight with the courts, but Mr. Ballinger seems to 
be possessed with a burning desire to have the Judge Townsend 
opinion discussed and analyzed, and before I attempt an analyza- 
tion or discussion of the opinion I would lilce to draw a picture of 
Judge Clayton and of Judge Townsend — that is, a mind's picture. 
Judge Clayton regarded the law as a jealous mistress. He Avor- 
shipped for uiore than two-<(uarters of a century at the shrine of jus- 
tice, and in his early manhood was regarded as one of the strongest 
and one of the ablest lawyers at the bar of Arkansas. After his ap- 
pointment to the Federal bench in the Indian Territory he was 
regarded as one of the most eminent judges in that Territory. It 
is a well-known fact that he Avaa reversed less than any other judge 
within that jurisdiction. Judge Townsend, while an elegant gen- 
tleman and a big-hearted man, had only devoted a few years to the 
practice of law when he entered politics. He remained in politics 
for a number of years and then engaged in the mining business. 
After having followed that avocation for a number of years he was 
appointed to the bench in the Indian Territory as the compliment 
of a college clium. While he was an honest judge, he did not have 
the legal training that Judge Clayton had. While he was a good 
man, he did not have the legal mind that Judge Clayton had devel- 
oped through long years of legal work, both at the bar and on the 
bench. Any lawyer has but to read the opinions of the two judges 
in this particular case to determine that fact. Hearsay evidence is 
seldom admissible. 

Mr. RrcTiARDSON. Mr. liond, if I may interrupt you: If the facts 
with relation to these judges be true, why was it that the Choctaw 
and ChickasaAV Nations complained so bitterly of their decisions in 
the citizenship cases and their inaccuracies that they insisted upon 
and secured the appointment of a Choctaw and Chickasaw citizen 
court which proceeded to review and reverse their decisions in the 
matter of several thousand cases? 



36 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. Bond. BecaiiFe, Mr. Richardson, the courts were overworked. 
Their dockets were so consested that they did not have the time nor 
the opportunity to give these cases their personal supervision and 
they were tried hirgely by masters. Many names crept into those 
cases by interpohition. In those days hiwyers were not as numerous 
in Oklahoma as in some other States.* The attorneys of experience 
and ability were busj' practicing at the bar. The young men just 
entering the practice were often given a master's duty, and it might 
be possible that they, through some misunderstanding of the law, 
allowed error to creep into the record. You well know, as a lawyer, 
that when a master makes a report to a busy court the report is 
generally adopted without much ceremony, and further, very few, 
if any, Mississippi Choctaws w^ere involved in those court decisions; 
and if I am correctly informed, none of the clients that you represent 
were involved in any case in the Federal court in the Indian Terri- 
tory. 

Mr. Richardson. It has been my understanding that those cases 
were not reversed on- the facts in each case, but on generic and juris- 
dictional questions affecting all those questions which were errone- 
ously decided by Judge Clayton and Judge Townsend. 

Mr. Hurley. If Mr. Bond will permit me to answer that question? 

Mr. Bond. Certainly, Mr. Hurley. 

Mr, Hurley, As a matter of fact, the judgments to which I believe 
you are referring now are judgments which were found to be a nul- 
lity because of the lack of original jurisdiction. The Dawes Com- 
mission had stricken certain names from the rolls under the act of 
June 10, 1896, and the applicant whose name was stricken appealed 
to the United States court, and it was afterwards determined that 
the commission had no power under that act to strike any name from 
the roll, and consequently an appeal from a commission that had no 
jurisdiction conferred no jurisdiction upon the court, and those 
judgments were not set aside by reason of any finding of fact in the 
case, but because of the fact that the court had no jurisdiction; there 
was a lack of original jurisdiction. 

Mr. Richardson. I was referring to the decision of the citizenship 
court in what is known as the Court Claimants case, in Avhich one of 
the general questions involved was the failure to make the chiefs of 
both tribes parties to the case. 

Mr. Hurley. If you Avill read the decision in the Eliza West case 
and the opinion of the Attorney General in that case, you will, I 
believe, arrive at a clear undei'standing of what was considered the 
basis for setting aside those decisions^ It has been argued by the 
proponents of this bill and for tlie opening of the roll that they were 
set aside merely on the ground that while the citizenship asked for 
•was citizenship in both the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, the chief 
or governor of but one tribe had been served in the suit, but under- 
lying all of that was the controlling fact that in the cases which 
were appealed from the Dawes Commission under the act of 1896 
there was a lack of original jurisdiction and the judgment of the 
court based on such an appeal was therefore a nullity- 
Mr. Bond. Perhaps I misunderstood your question. I had just 
paid a just eulogy to Judge Clayton's legal ability, and I understood 
you to ask why so many errors should creep into these cases with 
such an eminent judge on the bench. 



ENROLI.iMENT IX THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 37 

Mr. IliCHAKDsoN. My suggestion was developed by the difference 
in the attitude which you as tribal attorney are now taking in re- 
gard to Judge Clayton from what was urged here in 1901 and 1902 
by the Choctaw and ChickasaAV Nations, that many errors had been 
committed by the very judge you now eulogize. 

Mr. Bond. 1 think I can make that matter perfectly clear by 
simply referring 3'ou to the act of Congress of 1902. The conten- 
tion made by counsel Avho were formerly representing the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations is set forth in section 31 of said act, which 
reads in part as follows: 

It being clMinied and insi.st'.Hl by the Clitn'tiiw i\ud Chu'k;;s;iw X;itioiis that 
the United States courts in the Indian Territory, acting under the act of 
Congress approved June 10, ls<)6, have admitteii persons to citizenshii) or to 
enrollment as such citizens in tlie Choctavp and Cliickasaw Nations, respectively, 
without notice of the proceedings in such courts being given to each of said 
nations; and it being insisted by said nations tlaat, in such proceedings, notice 
to each of said nations was indispensable, and it being claimed and insisted by 
said nations tliat the proceedings in the United States courts in the Indian 
Territory, under the said .".ct of June 10, ISUG. should have been confined to a 
review of the action of the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, upon 
the papers and evidence submitted to such commission, and should not have 
extended to ;! trial de novo of the question of citizenship ; and it being de- 
sirable to finally determine these questions, tlie two nations, jointly, or either 
of said nations acting separately and making the other n party defendant, may, 
wihin 00 days after this agreement becomes effective, by a bill in equity hied 
in the Choctaw and Chicka.saw citizenship court hereinafter named, seek the 
annulment and vacation of all such decisions by said courts. 

That is evidently the act you had in mind when you asked me the 
question; and after reading the act I have nothing to retract, be- 
cause 3'ou, as a lawyer, know that any judge is apt to commit error. 
If it were not for error, appellate courts would be useless institu- 
tions. If it Avere not for the right of appeal and the possibility of 
reversal, the practice would not be so remunerative. I have never, 
to my knowledge, practiced before a corrupt judge; yet I do not 
put any man above error. To err is human; and while those cases 
were reversed on errors of law, thereafter they were heard on their 
merits. 

I desire to call your attention to the fact that in construing the 
clause, " Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privi- 
lege of a Choctaw citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be 
entitled to any portion of the ChoctaAv annuities." Judge Townsend 
violated two fundamental rules of statutory construction. The first 
rule of construction violated Avas that he treated as redundant and 
rejected as surplusage the Avords "if they ever remove," and he did 
that in direct violation of a Avell-established princi])le of statutory 
construction that has been recognized by all the Avriters and by all 
the decisions. 

Another rule of statutory construction. The second article of the 
treaty of 1830 provides in part as folloAvs: 

In fee simple to them and their descendants, to inure to them while they shall 
exist as a nation and live on it. 

This provision in the treaty provides that they must live upon the 
land in order to retain title thereto. The provision Avith reference 
to removal must be construed so as to harmonize Avith section 2 and 
not destroy the force and effect thereof, if possible. Judge Clayton 
construed those tAvo sections so they harmonized absolutely. Judge 



38 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Townsend has construed them so that the fourteenth article of the 
treaty is in absohitc conflict "svith the second article of the treaty. 
In fact, Judge Townsend paid no attention whatever to statutory 
construction and did not attempt to explain -why he did not make 
an effort to apply the rules of statutory construction to article 2 and 
article 14 of the treaty. 

Judge Townsend's construction of the treaty of 1866 is in conflict 
with the opinion of ever}'^ court and every commission which has ever 
attempted to pass upon that treaty. I will read you his language: 

When it wns supposed tliat tlie Innds would be allotted in severalty under 
the trenty of 18G6, it was expressly provided that notice should be pablished in 
the papers of several States that absent Choctaws and Chickasaws nii.;,'Iit come 
in and obtain the benefits of the allotment, and absentees were to be allowed 
five years to occupy and commence improvements; and all that was necessary 
was to satisfy the register of the land oftice that that w.-.s their intention. 
The allotment did not take place; but if they had not come in, they were only 
to lo?e their allotment of land; it did not make them any the less Choctaws or 
Chickasaws or members of the Choctaw or Chickasaw Tribes. 

It has been said that they could not be put upon the roll as citizens and mem- 
bers of those tribes unless they lived upon the land within the Choctaw or 
Chickasaw Nation. I submit tiiat the action of the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations themselves when making the treaty of 1SG8 does not bear out the 
view; and if they were Choctaws and Chickasaws in 1SG6, what has occurred - 
to change their relations to those tribes? I have heard of nothing whatever. 

It is said the land was held in common, and certainly some of the tenants 
in common in possession could hold the possession for all their cotenants in 
common. 

As I have said before, it has been recognized by everyone that 
when the Congress and the Indians made the treaty of 1SG6 they 
simply provided for notice in the article just read in order that the 
Indians who were living in other States might avail themselves of 
the privilege under the fourteenth article of the treaty to disaffirm 
their allegiance to those States and to reaffirm it to the Choctaw 
Nation and become citizens of that nation. 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Bond, have you there that provision of the treaty 
of 1866? 

Mr. Bond. I think Mr. Hurley ofi'ered in evidence that pro^■isioIl 
of the treaty of 1866, did you not, Mr. Hurley? 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Bond. Now, he says that the land was held in common. The 
Supreme Court of the United States has held that under the treaty 
of 1830 we did not hold our lands in common. While the court does 
not say that we absolutely held them in common in 1855, it intimates 
that since that treaty they were held in connnon. I will read you the 
decision in the case of Fleming v. McCurtain, reported in two hun- 
dred and fifteenth United States, page 56 : 

The grant in letters patent, issued in pursuance of the treaty of Dancing 
Rabbit Creek of September 27. 1830. conveying the tract described to the Choc- 
taw Indians in fee simple to them and their descendants to inure to them 
while they should exist as a nation and live thereon, was a grant to the 
Choctaw Nation, to be administered by it as such: it did not create a trust for 
the individuals then comprising the nation and their respective descendants, 
in whom as tenants in common the legal title would merge with the equitable 
title on dissolution of tlie nation. 

It even goes so far as to hold that on the dissolution of the nation 
that the legal title would not even then merge with the equitable and 
result to the benefit of the descendants as tenants in common. 



ENKOLLMENT IN TlflE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 39 

The Supreme Court of the United States likewise held in One 
hundred and seventeenth United States, page 308, that the title 
vested in the Cherokee Nation was not a title held in common, and 
the Cherokees held title the same as the Choctaws. The court used 
the following language: 

They were held, it is true, for the common benefit of all the Cherokees, but 
that does not mean that each member had such an interest as a tenant in com- 
mon that he could claim a pro rata proportion of the proceeds of sales made 
of auy part of them. 

I will read again from Two hundred and fifteenth United States, 
which suggests that under a later treaty it is quite possible that our 
lands are held in common : 

But these allegations make out no case for the plaintiffs. It is said that the 
statutes recognize individual rights as already existuig. It is true that by a 
treaty of June 22, 1S55, the United States guaranteed the lands " to the mem- 
bers of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes, their heirs and successors, to be 
held in common, so that each and every member of either tribe shall have an 
equal, undivided interest in the whole" with provisos. But the plaintiffs do 
not claim under this treaty or mention it in their bill or a treaty of April 2S, 
1S66, by articles 11-36, of which the change from common to individual own- 
ership was agreed, and it was provided that unselected lands should "be the 
common proiJerty of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations in their corporate 
capacities." 

If the committee please, every court that has ever passed upon this 
question under the treaty of 1830 and every court that has ever 
passed upon like treaties has held that it is communal property; 
that it is not held in common ; that individual Indians could not 
maintain a suit in partition for their interest; that they have not 
such a vested right as could be adjudicated and determined in the 
courts; and that the property is in the tribe entirely. 

Now, just one other point with reference to the Townsend case 

Mr. Carter. What did Judge Clayton say about the treaty of 
1866, if anything? 

Mr. Bond. Judge Clayton held that after the treaty of 1855 the 
land was held in common, and said that the treaty of 1866 provided 
for removal as a condition precedent to Choctaw citizenship. I read 
from his opinion : 

The counsel for the claimants lay considerable stress on the effect of the 
provisions of article 13 of the treaty of 1S66 between the United States and 
the Choctaw Nation. 

By the eleventh and twelfth articles of that treaty a scheme was devised by 
which the lands of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations were to be surveyed, 
and divided and allotted to the individual Indians, provided the councils of 
the respective nations should agree to it, which, however, they have refused 
to do. A land office was to be established at Boggy Dejiot, in the Choctaw 
Nation. When all of the surveys were completed mai)s thereof were to be 
filed in the ?aid hind office, sub.iect to the insjiection of all parties interested, 
and immediately thereafter notice of such filing was to be given for !)0 days 
calling ui)on all parties interested to examine s:iid maps, to the end that errors 
In tlie location of occupancies, which were to be noted on the mnps, might be 
corrected. Then followed article 13 of the treaty, which is as follows: 

"Art. 13. The notice required in the above article shall be given, not only 
In the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, but by publication in newspapers 
I)rinted in the States of Mississippi and Tennessee, Louisiana, Texas, Ark.insas, 
and Al;ib;ima, to the end that such Choctiiws and Chickasaws as yet remain 
outside of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Ntions my be informed and have oppor- 
tunity to exercise the rights hereby given to resident Choctaws and Chickasaws: 
Provided, That before any such aljsent Choctaw or Chickasaw shall be per- 



40 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

tnitted to select for him or herself or others as hereinafter provided, he or 
she shall satisfy the register of the land otilce of his or her intention, or the 
hitentiou of the party for whom the selection is to be made, to become a bona 
fide resident in the said nation within five years from the time of selection; 
find should the said absentee fail to remove into said nation and occupy and 
connneuce an improvement on the land selected within the time aforesaid the 
said selection shall be canceled, and the land shall thereafter be discharged 
from all claim on account thereof." 

From an examination of this article of the treaty it will be seen that the 
Choctaws and Chickasaws recognized the right of absent members of their 
nation to participate in the allotment and the subsequent ownership of their 
lands to the same extent as they themselves enjoyed, but on conditions, how- 
ever, first, that they should satisfy the register of the land office of their inten- 
tion to become bona fide residents in the said nation within five years from the 
time of said selection; and, second, that within the said five years they should 
fictually remove into the said nation (here is a statute of limitation) ; and, third, 
that within the said five years they should occupy and commence an improve- 
ment upon the selected lands. 

It will be observed that this latter clause impoess a condition on absent 
Indians nowhere required of the resident ones by any clause of the treaty. 
They were required to move into the country and show their good faith and 
their intention to remain bona fide citizens of the nation by actual occupancy of 
the land and an expenditure of money in its improvement. The notice was to 
be given them in order that they might have an opportunity of removing into 
the nation and there I'esiding and resuming their rights as citizens; but care 
was to be taken and safeguards provided by which their removal was to be 
actually had, and that it was to be done in good faith. First, the register of the 
laud office was to be convinced, by such proof as might satisfy him, of tbe in- 
tention of the absent Indians to become a bona fide resident of the nation be- 
fore he was allowed to make a selection; and second, that was to be followed 
by an actual occupancy and improvement of the land, and if he failed in this it 
worked a forfeiture of his rights. Nowhere within the whole treaty is any right 
recognized or conferred on an absent Indian, except on the condition that he 
ehall remove into the nation, and the right is not to be consummated or en- 
joyed until after actual removal. No treaty or act of the Choctaw Council or 
of any ofiicer of the Choctaw Nation since the treaty of 1830 can be cited, or at 
least I have not found them, whereby any right or privilege has been conferred, 
granted, or recognized in or to a Mississippi Choctaw so long as he shall re- 
main away from his people, but there are an infinitude of such acts and con- 
duct granting and recognizing such right and privileges to him after he shall 
Lave removed. 

The provisions of the treaty of 1S66, so far from being an authority in favor 
of the contention of claimants, seems to me to he strongly against them. 

Judge Townsend's opinion is entitled " In re Indian citizenship 
cases," and it is found in the Sixth Annual Report of the Commis- 
sion to the Five Civilized Tribes, at page 109. It bears this certifi- 
cate : 

I, C. M. Campbell, clerk of the United States court within and for the south- 
ern district of the Indian Territory, do hereby certify that the annexed and 
foregoing is a true, perfect, and literal copy of the general opinion of the Hon. 
Hosea Townsend. .judge of the United States Court of the Southern District 
of the Indian Territory, filed in my office. 

Now, mark you, a '" literal copy of the general opinion." That 
bears out the hearsay doctrine that I attempted to refer to a few 
minutes ago. I was at college at the time this opinion was rendered, 
but I have been told that the opinion was handed down in the law 
office of Furman & Herbert; that no case was under consideration; 
that some of the lawyers representing citizenship cases and some rep- 
resenting the nation desired the opinion of Judge Tawnsend on 
certain citizenship questions, and that this was the general opinion 
handed down to them in the law office above referred to, no particu- 
lar case being under consideration. I think the record bears out my 



ENKOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 41 

hearsay contention. But, be that as it may, Jiiclire Townsend did 
not remain of that opinion. I refer to a case tried by Judi>e Town- 
send and reported in volume 4, Indian Territory Iveports, at page 214. 

Mr. Carter. What is the case? 

Mr. BoA'D. The case is entitled " Ikard v. Minter." 

Mr. Richardson. What is the date of the delivery of the opinion? 

Mr. Bond. The opinion was delivered September 25, 1902. Judge 
Townsend was the trial judge. The case was appealed and affirmed 
by the appellate court. I will read you from the syllabus: 

Showing tliiit he was a Mississippi Choctaw was not siifHcient, for prior to 
1S9S the j\rississippi Choctaw not then on the regular roll of the Choctaw 
Katioa could not hold lands in the Choctaw Nation, but had only the right to 
go before the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes and make the necessary 
proof, securing his enrollment under the act of Congress of June 2S, 1S9S, and 
the act of Congress of INIay 31, 1900. 

Judge Townsend evidently had a change of heart and he evidently 
had a change of mind, because he says that they, the Mississippi 
Choctaws, had no right until 1898, and in this general opinion enti- 
tled '' In re Citizenship cases," he says that they were Choctaw citi- 
zens all the time, and that he had heard of nothing that prevented 
them from being Choctaw citizens. Now, let us read further from 
Judge Townsend's own language, not from the appellate court affirm- 
ing him. On page 221 he says : 

The Court. I recollect a little about It, because when I wrote the general 
opinion that I gave in these citizenship cases I went through every treaty 
from 1TS4 down, and read every one of them, and at that time I was pretty 
familiar with it, but I have been annoyed so much in trying lawsuits since 
that time that I have nearly forgotten everything I knew of that question. 
But my recollection at that time there were conditions; they had got to sell 
their lands and come to this country; and that this provision in the Curtis 
Act is the first provision giving that recognition. 

Now listen: 

They had got to sell their lauds and come to this country. 

Judge Townsend's language verbatim ! Evidently, gentlemen of 
the committee, he had just left his mining interests in Colorado 
when he handed down that general opinion. In 1900 or 1902 he had 
been on the bench for three, four, or five years, and his early legal 
training was evidently coming back to him. Yet you gentlemen 
tout " In re Citizenship cases " as being an opinion of the court. 
If it had been an opinion in a case on trial, and it was not, he 
would have reversed himself after a more careful and deliberate 
consideration, as is shoAvn ])y the opinion in the Ikard-Minter case. 
Why. Mr. Ballinger says that after that "In re Citizenship" case 
opinion was rendered by Judge Townsend attorneys visited the 
Indian Committees of Congress and so impressed them with that 
opini(;n that they had an act j^asscd in 1897 re(]uiring the commis- 
sion to repc;rt as to the rights of the Mississip])i Choctaws. The 
act reads as follows : • 

That the commission ap]iointed to negotiate with the Five Civilized Tribes in 
the Indian Territory shall exann'ne and rei)Ort to Congress whether the Mis- 
sissipi)i Choctaws, under their treaties, are not entitled to all the rights of Choc- 
taw citizenship, except an interest in the Choctaw annuities. 

I Avill read in part from the report of the commission, in com- 
pliance therewith, and contained in House Document No. 274, second 



42 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

session of the Fifty-fifth Congress. It is very elaborate, and I will 
read only a few short passages : 

The Mississippi Choctaws are the descendants of those Choctaw Indians who 
declined to remove to the Indian Territory with the tribe under the provisions 
of the treaty made with the United States September 27, 1S30. * * * 

They claim the right to continue their residence and political status in 
Mississippi as they and those from whom they descended have done for G5 
years, and still are entitled to enjoy all the rights of Choctaw citizenship, 
except to share in the Choctaw annuities. * * * 

What their political status is in the State of Mississippi is defined in the 
fourteenth article of the treaty. Their ancestors, each, was to signify, within 
six months after the ratification of tlie treaty, his desire to remain and become 
a citizen of the States, which would entitled them to G40 acres of land and 
a less amount to each member of his family, and after a residence on the 
same of five years, with intent to become a citizen, are then entitled to a 
patent in fee, and are thereby made citizens of the States. Tbeir ancestors 
having done this, they claim, under the concluding clause of said article, that 
their ancestors could and they now can continue such citizenship and residence 
in Mississippi and be still entitled to all the rights of a Choctaw citizen in 
the tribal property of said nation in the Indian Territory, except tlieir annu- 
ities. This clause, upon which the claim rests, is in these words: 

"Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choc- 
taw citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any portion of the 
Choctaw annuities." 

But this construction is in direct conflict with the very purpose for which 
the treaty was made, and with the nature of the title to the lands in the Ter- 
ritory secured to tlie Choctaws by it, and to the whole structure and adminis- 
tration of their government ever since under it. * * * 

Tliere can be no longer doubt that the present title is in tlie members of the 
tribes alone, and that the United States has pledged itself to so maintain it. 
and that it so does, in the belief of both parties to the treaty that such was the 
title from the beginning. No man can, therefore, as the title now stands, have 
any interest in these lands unless he is a member in one of these tribes. 

Now. it has been a law of the Choctaw Nation from the beginning of its ex- 
istence, recognized by tlie Sujireme Court and by Congress, that no man can be 
a citizen of that nation who does not reside in it and assume the obligations of 
such citizenship before he can enjoy its privileges. To "enjoy the privileges 
of a Choctaw citizen " one must be a Choctaw citizen.- * * * 

This historical review of the acquisition of this territory by the Choctaw 
Nation, and its subsequent legal relations to it, malies it clear, in the opinion 
of this commission, that the ^lississippi Choctaws are not, under their treaties, 
entitled to "all the riahts of Choctaw citizenship except an interest in the 
Choctaw annuities." and still continue tlieir residence and citizenship in the 
State of Mississippi. 

Then the commission concludes its opinion with this statement: 

In conclusion, it seems to the commission that the importance of a correct 
decision of this question, both to the Mississippi Choctaws and to the Choctaw 
Nation, justities the pro\ision for a judicial decision in a case provided for that, 
purpose. They therefore suggest that in proper form jurisdiction may be given 
the Court of tHainis to pass judicially upon this question in a suit brought foi 
that purjiose by either of the interested parties. 

The Chairman. When was that decision rendered? 

Mr. Bond. January 28, 1898. Now, gentlemen of the committee, 
time and again I have heard from the floor of the House and from 
the floor of tlio Senate tliat the provision in the act of 1900 and in 
the agreement of 1902 providing for the removal of the Choctaw 
before he should enjoy Choctaw citizenship was simply put over by 
designing parties, and tliat certain Members of the House and of the 
Senate had no idea that such provisions were being injected into the 
act or into the agreement. And you gentlemen have heard the same 
argument. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 43 

Wliere were the distinguished gentlemen of intellectual excellence 
when the act of 1897 was passed calling for this report? Where were 
the gentlemen of sophistry and ingenuity and fine debating qualities 
when this report was filed as a House document? If the gentlemen 
of legal attainments were not satisfied with that document, why did 
not they ask that it be submitted to the Court of Claims, with a right 
of appeal to the Supreme Court of the United States, as suggested 
by the commission ? Tell me that they did not know that there was 
going to be a provision placed in the act of 1900 and the agreement 
of 1902 that the Choctaw must remove before he could enjoy citizen- 
ship, in the face of the Jack Amos case and in the face of an ex- 
haustive opinion filed as a House document. Congress took the 
vieAV that Judge Clayton rendered a just and fair decision. Congress 
took the view that Judge Clayton's construction of the fourteenth 
article of the treaty was correct, because Congress did not refer this 
question to the Court of Claims as suggested bv the commission, but 
passed an act providing that the Mississippi Choctaws should have 
a certain time within which to remove. Congress acted with full 
knowledge and with full information with reference to all these facts. 
This entire document, consisting of several pages, deals with prac- 
tically but one question, and that is the question of removal, and yet 
that is the question which was supposedly put over without the 
knowledge of certain Members of Congress. 

Let us see what Mr. Cantwell has to say about the legislation which 
grew out of this report. I read from page 11 of the hearing before 
the subcommittee last session: 

The stiitement I desire to make is made in belialf of several thousands of 
claimants to rijjhts in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes, whose rights. I 
undertake to show by I'ecord evidence, have been recognized by Congress, but the 
recovery of whose rights has been defeated and the rights piMctically nullified 
by the enactment of legislation at the instigation of interested persons for 
selfish ends. 

I believe I can show that this was accomplished by a conspiracy, and that the 
powers of the United States Government have be^ usurped by the conspirators. 

Keading further from Mr. Cantwell's statement, on page 50 : 

It is not conceivable, because JMcMurray smuggled through Congress, in 3902, 
an agreement between himself and the officers of the Dawes Commission, who 
were absolutely ignorant of the effect of the agreement, that this agreement iu 
any way binds Congress so as to prevent it from righting those wrongs, or that 
Congress intended, by this smuggled act, to change its policy. 

And mark you, Mr. Cantwell bases practically his entire argument 
on one question, and that is that under the fourteenth article of the 
treaty of 1830 the Mississippi Choctaw has the full right to citizen- 
ship, has the full right to share in the distril)ution of tribal funds 
and properties without removal, and it is evident that Congress, hav- 
ing before it the report above referred to, acted advisedly. 

Now, let us go further and see Avhat Mr. Cantwell has to say about 
the citizenship court. 

McMnrray successfully invoked the power (if Congress to destroy rights fully 
vested by the solenni final judgments of United Sfates circuit courts by secur- 
ing in an unguarded hour the creation of that judicial monstrosity, the citizeu- 
Bhip court. 

It has been argued by Mr. Cantwell, not only at this hearing but 
at other hearings, that the act creating the Choctaw citizenship court 
absolutely nullified and abrogated every judgment that had been 



44 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

rendered by the T'nited States courts in the Indian Territory. I 
have argued before that Congress can not nullify judgments; that 
Congress can not grant a new trial : that Congress can not abrogate 
a decree. I desire to offer now the decision rendered by the Su)3reme 
Court of the United States in the Wallace- Adams case, wherein the 
act creating the Choctav^'-Chickasaw citizenship court was fully 
discussed; and j^ou will note in that case that counsel for the 
claimants made the same contention that ISIr. Cantwell has made 
here — that the act attempted to nullify a judgment. But the Su- 
preme Court did not agree Avith counsel. Perhaps I had better read 
from the act creating that court and then refer to the decision. I 
read in part from section 31 of the act of 1902 : 

In the exercise of such api)ellate .iuriSdiction, said citizenship court shall be 
authorized to consider, review, and revise all such judgments, both as to find- 
ings of fact and conclusions of law, and m:'y, wherever in its judgment substan- 
tial justice will thereby be subserved, permit either p;;rty to any such appeal 
to talce and present such further evidence as may be necessary to enable said 
court to determine the very right of the controversy. And said court shall have 
power to make all nee.lful rules and regulations prescribing the manner of 
taking and conducting said appeals and of taking additional evidence therein. 

I read from the opinion of the court in the case of Wallace v. 
Adams, reported in Two hundred and fourth United States, at 
page 415 : 

And while it is undonbteilly true that legislatures can not set aside the judg- 
ments of courts, compel them to grant new trials, order the discharge of offend- 
ers, or direct what slejis shall be taken in the progi-ess of a judicial inquiry, 
the grant of a new remedy by way of review has been often sustained under 
particular circumstances. 

Reading further: 

The United States court in the Indian Territory is a legislative court, and 
was authorized to exercise jurisdiction in these citizenship cases as a part of 
the machinery devised by Congress in the discharge of its duties in respect of 
these Indian tribes; and assuming that Congress possesses plenary power of 
legislation in regard to them, subject only to the Constitution of the United 
States, it follows that the vaTidity of remedial legislation of this sort can not 
be questioned miless in violation of some prohibition of that instrument. 

In its enactment Congress iuis not a.ttenipted to interfere in any way with the 
judicial department of the Government, nor can the act be properly regarded 
as destroying any vested right, since the right asserted to be vested is only the 
exemption of these judgments from review. 

I stated to the committee at the previous hearing that Congress 
could not review the judgment of the Supreme Court of the United 
States, because it is not a legislative court. All Federal courts are 
legislative courts created by acts of Congress, save the Supreme 
Court of the United States, which is a constitutional court. I desire 
to read a short passage from the case of Wallace v. Adams, which is 
a very clear statement of the law : 

It is unnecessary to consider what would have been the effect of a judgment 
of this court, a court provided for in the constitution, on the question of the 
right of a litigant to citizenship. The distinction between this court and the 
courts established by act of Congress in virtue of its power to ordain and 
establish inferior courts is shown in Gordon v. United States, 117 United 
States. Oni. in whicli we held that while Congress could give to the Court of 
Claims jurisdiction to inquire and report upon claims against the Government, 
it could not authorize an appeal from such report to this court unless our 
decision was made a final judgment, not Subject to congressional review. * * * 



6^ 

ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 45 

Consrress can not extend the appellate power of this court beyond the limits 
prescribed by tlie Constitution, and can neither confer nor impose on it the 
duty of hearing and determining an appeal from a commissioner or auditor, or 
any other tribunal exercising only special powers under an act of Congress; 
nor can Congress authorize or require this court to express an opinion on a 
case where its judicial power could not be exercised, and where its judgment 
would not be final and conclusive upon the rights of the parties and process of 
execution awarded to carry it into effect. 

Mr. EiCHARDSON. In that case, did not the Supreme Court hold 
that the Territorial courts in hearing- these appeals were exercising 
special functions intrusted to them as an aid to Congress in the per- 
formance of its duties, and that their acts were a little more than 
the acts of a commission? 

Mr. Bond. That is true, and their judgments are subject to review, 
but in all cases in which the Supreme Court has spoken the judg- 
ment is final and beyond congressional action. 

(Thereupon, at 4.15 o'clock p. m., the subcommittee adjourned 
until Monday, August 17, 1914, at 2 o'clock p. m.) 



Subcommittee of Cominiittee on Indian Affairs, 

House of Representatives, 

Monday^ August 17^ 19H. 
The subcommittee met at 2.10 o'clock p. m., Hon. Charles D. Carter 
(chairman) presiding. 

STATEMENT OF MR. REFOED BOND— Continued. 

Mr. Bond. I desire to call the committee's attention to a statement 
made by INIr. Cantwell, of counsel for the proponents, which appears 
on page 38 of the hearing before the Subcommittee on Indian Affairs 
of the House : 

A great mr.uy Mississippi Choctaws bad gone into the Territory and had not 
been able to be enrolled by the commission prior to June 2S, IS9S. The identifi- 
cation conten)i)lated by the first clause did not entitle the Mississijipi Choctaws 
to enrollment. Under another provision of this act of July 1, 1902, they might 
make bona fide settlement within the Choctaw-Chickasaw country within six 
mouths after identification by the commission; but he could not get any laud 
upon which to settle until after he should be enrolled or identified. How could 
he settle unless lands were given? If he undertook to go into the Choctaw or 
Chickasaw country at all, McJIurray ejected him, through the tribal authori- 
ties, as an intruder. The statements contained in this appendix by Mr. Mc- 
Murray show that he called upon the United States Government for soldiers 
to eject what he called intruders, and all persons were intruders, according to 
bis definition, who were not upon the tribal rolls. The old method of identifi- 
cation by the tribe had been abandoned, and if the Mississippi Choctaw went 
into the Choctaw-Chickasaw country he was liable to be ejected as an intruder 
because he was not on the tribal rolls, even if he went to the Indian Territory 
for the mere purpose of identification. 

That statement of counsel is unwarranted by law and by the evi- 
dence. However, it Avas made last session without contradiction and 
with no law and no evidence to controvert the statement, and neces- 
sarily the committee found that claimants under the fourteenth 
article of the treaty were rejected as intruders. 

Mr. Miller. The subcommittee did not make a finding to that 
effect, did they? 

Mr. Bond. Yes, sir. 



46 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Mr. Miller. I should be surprised to find that they did. My recol- 
lection is that the statement contained in the report is based ex- 
clusively upon the wording of the subsequent treaties or congres- 
sional acts bearing upon the Choctaw and Chickasaw and the Five 
Civilized Tribes. 

Mr. Bond. On page 27 of the report of the subcommittee I find 
this statement by Mr. Miller : 

Yes, some of tliese eleven huutlred actually removed, and some when removed 
were ejected by otHcers of the Choctaws and Chickasuws because they were 
"interlopers." Some remained in the new country, but were never enrolled. 
Others drifted away. I think Mr. Carter knows there are some Choctaws in 
Oklahoma belonging to this eleven hundrel. 

I take it that the statement of their being ejected by officers of the 
Choctaws and Chickasaws because they Avere interlopers was a find- 
ing in accordance with the statement and argument of counsel that 
they were ejected as intruders. If I am incorrect I desire to with- 
draw the statement. 

Mr. Miller. I do not think the occasion for that statement is as 
you intimate, Mr. Bond. I will say that practically all the infor- 
mation that I secured was from as nearly original sources as it could 
be, and most of it came from out of the department. Now, I do not 
recall exactly what I had in mind when I made that statement, but 
I tliink it was this : The word " interlopers " probably is inadvisedly 
used ; it should be " intruders." We all know^ that there were a great 
many intruders that came into the country, and it was necessary for 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw people to keep them out. Now, I did 
not intend by that to say that they kept out Mississippi Choctaws 
only as intruders, but that the general inhibition against people 
coming in there who had no rights in there applied to some who 
might be claiming to be Mississippi Choctaws the same as the rest. 
I presinne that some of the individuals enumerated in this list might 
have been included. I have only a faint recollection of where I got 
that declaration in regard to the 1,100, but I think it w^as from the 
Indian office. 

Mr. Bond. If that is so, I stand corrected. I am very glad that the 
committee did not so find. I am pleased to know that I miscon- 
strued the finding of the committee on that point. However, it has 
been so alleged by Mr. Cantwell, of counsel for the proponents, and 
therefore I desired to refute it. 

The CiiAiRiMAN. Was there any attempt at that time made to re- 
move persons from the Choctaw Nation except such persons as did 
not comply with the laws of the Choctaw Nation? 

Mr. Bond. No parties were attempted to be removed from the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations to my knowledge except those who 
refused to comply with the intruder laws. Any person who was 
not a member of the tribe w\as required under the law of the tribe 
to pay a permit of $1 per year for his right of residence within 
the tribe, and if he refused to pay the $1 per year he Avas then sub- 
ject to ejection as an intruder. 

The Ctlmrman. That was the law, but let me ask j^ou what was 
the practice? What percentage of the white people that were in 
the country at that time were paying a permit tax, would you judge? 

Mr. Bond. I would judge that a very small percentage of the 
white people paid the permit tax. If my memory serves me cor- 



ENEOLLMENT IF THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 47 

rectly, the tax in the Chickasaw Nation was increased in later years 
to $5" per annum, and I believe that after the increase very few people 
paid the tax. 

The Chairman. Is it not a fact that no removals were attempted 
to be made by the tribal authorities? 

Mr. Miller. Well, as I recall, we had a vast amount of informa- 
tion submitted to the committee that was down there to investigate 
the McJNIurray and other contracts. There was evidence that large 
amounts of money were used to eject intruders. 

The Chairman. Well, I will come to that in a minute. Wliat I am 
asking Mr. Bond now is, Did the tribal authorities attempt to remove 
them, and had they any authoi-ity to remove them? Did the tribal 
authorities have any jurisdiction to remove people, Mr. Bond? 

Mr. Bond. The tribal authorities in later days possibly were shorn 
of that jurisdiction, but the tribal authorities, so far as my knowl- 
edge goes, did not attempt the ejection of individuals; but there 
were other taxes in addition to the per capita tax. 

The Chairman. We will come to that in a moment. 

Mr. Bond. There was a tax per head on cattle and per dollar on 
merchandise. At one time the noncitizens refused to pay the cattle 
tax and merchandise tax, which caused the tribal and Federal au- 
thorities a great deal of trouble and considerable expense in the 
collection thereof, and there were efforts to eject the people who 
refused to pay those taxes. 

The CiiAiRiMAN. I was coming to that in a moment, but the things 
I want the record to show is this : Whether or not the tribal authori- 
ties had any jurisdiction under the laAv to remove people who were 
intruders, and whether they attempted to exercise that jurisdiction 
during your memory. 

]Mr. Bond. Not during my memory, Mr. Carter. After the United 
States courts were given jurisdiction in the Indian Territory and 
after jurisdiction was conferred on the United States Indian agent, 
the tribal authorities had no jurisdiction of intruders whatever, be- 
cause they were citizens of the United States, and the tribal authori- 
ties only had jurisdiction of tribal citizens. 

The Chairman. And the only thing the tribal authorities could 
do was to report the matter and urge their removal Avith the Federal 
authorities. Is not that true? 

Mr. Bond. I think that was the extent of their authority. 

The Chairman. Well, did not the Federal authorities attempt to 
remove people, and was not their attempt about that time confined 
entirely to those people who did not pay the merchants' tax license 
and the cattle-tax license? 

Mr. Bond. That is my recollection of the matter. 

The CiiAiRTiiAN. Do you know if there ever was any attempt made 
to remove any claimants for citizenship, whether Mississippi Choc- 
taw or otherwise? 

INIr. Bond. Not to my knowledge. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Carter, if it is not improper to put in the 
record at this time, I Avould like to state that the record shows that 
Mr. ]\IcMurray, or his firm of ISIansfield, McMurray & Cornisl), 
brought a suit in equity to require the commission not to allot and to 
exclude from allotment Mississippi Choctaws who did not move 
within the six-month period, under the act of 1902, and he secured 



48 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

an injunction against the commission. The petition and the injunc- 
tion in that suit were introduced on the floor of the United States 
Senate by ex-Senator Jones, of Arkansas, and will appear in the Con- 
gressional Record. 

The CiiAiRjFAN. That may be true, Mr. Richardson, but the ques- 
tion that was raised was about Mississippi ChoctaAvs being removed 
and net being permitted to settle in the Choctaw Nation in accordance 
with the act requiring them to settle. Mr. Bond says that nothing of 
that kind was done, and Mr. Miller says that they never intended 
to state that. 

Mr. Miller. No; we never intended to state that those who at- 
tempted to come over under the 1902 act were intruders. The state- 
ment went further to say that among the 1,100 who were identified 
some of them were i-emoved as intruders. I do not knoAv what the 
circumstances and facts were, but it Avas not simply because they tried 
to make a settlement. 

Mr. Bond. I will say in reply to Mr. Richardson that the acts 
giving the commission authority to enroll especially required that it 
should not be subject to an injunction proceeding. 

Mr. Richardson. There was an injunction issued in that case. 

Mr. Miller. Do you think the provisions of that treaty of 1902 
were fair and equitable as far as the Indians Avere concerned? 

Mr. Bond. I do. Many AA'ere identified under the act of 1898, and 
although they had theretofore almost three-quarters " f a century 
within Avhich to remoA-e, the treaty of 1902 allowed additional time 
for remoA'al and Avaived proof as to full bloods.' In my judgment 
the terms and provisions of the treaty AA^ere fair and equitable. 

I desire to read from the report of the commissioner to the Five 
Civilized Tribes to the Secretary of the Interior for the fiscal year 
ending June 30, 1907, at page 11: 

The act of Congress iipiiroved April 26, lOOfi, provided that motions for rp- 
heariiis; of cises adversely deterniined prior to the passapre of the act could be 
filed for a period of (10 days. Under this provision a hu-jre number of Missis- 
sippi Olioctaws, whose cbiinis had been rejected, filed motions for rehearinti of 
their cases, some of which had been closed for four j^ears. The Commissioner, 
acting under departmental instrnctions, allowed such persons to appear at the 
Land Otlice and designate tentative allotments pending final disposition of 
their claims. Through this procedure they maintained control of lands which 
duly enrolled citizens were entitled to select in allotment. When one motion 
was denied by the department the Mississippi Choctaw, often at the instance 
of speculators, would inunedi.itely file a second motion and then make the 
claim .'it the Land Office that his aiiplicatlon was not yet finally disposed of. 
This practice was carried on until a short time prior to the closing of the 
rolls, March 4, 1907. 

I desire to supplement the report of the commission with the law 
itself, Avhich provided that claimants Avere entitled to hold posses- 
sion of the land until their rights were finally determined. I read 
from section 3 of the act of June 28, 1898: 

That said courts are hereby given jurisdiction in their respective districts 
to try cases against those who may claim to hold as members of a tribe and 
whose membership is denied by the tribe, but who continue to hold said lands 
and tenements notwithstanding the objection of the tribe; and if it be found 
upon trial that the same are held unlawfully against the tribe by those claim- 
ing to be members thereof, and the membership and rights are disallowed by 
the commission to the Five [Civilized! Tribes, or the United States court, and 
the judgment has become final, then said court shall cause the parties charged 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 49 

with unlawfully holding said possessions to be removed from the same and cause 
the lands and tenements to be restored to the person or persons or nation or 
tribe of Indians entitled to the possession of the same. 

I also desire to read from section 4 of the said act, which shows 
that the}' Avere not only permitted to hold their lands until their 
cases Avere finally determined, btit they were allowed to dispose of 
the improA'ements Avhich they had placed thereon during the time 
the}^ were claiming citizenship : 

That all persons who have heretofore made improvements on lands belonging 
to any one of the said tribes of Indians, claiming rights of citizenship, whose 
claims have been decided adversely under the act of Congress approved June 
10, 1N90, shall have possession thereof until and including December 31, 1898; 
and may, prior to that time, sell or disi)ose of the same to any member of the 
tribe owning the land who desires to take the same in his allotment. 

I desire to call the committee's attention to one other statement 
made bj' ISIr. Cantwell. I read from the hearings of the subcom- 
mittee, at pages IT and 24. I read first from page 17 : 

Hei'e was a clause inserted in the treaty — * 

Speaking of the fourteenth article of the treaty — 

for the express purpose of individualizing the Indian, of breaking up the tribal 
organization, of subjecting him to the laws of the white man, and of making 
him a citizen of 'the United States; and as a penalty for his removal from 
his allotment in Mississippi he was to be deprived of his portion of the Choctaw 
annuity then existing. Jt is quite certain the intent of the treaty at the time 
it was made was to encourage the Indian to become a citizen of the State, and 
not to discourage him. 

I now read from page 24: 

The rights of the Mississippi Choctaw were granted to induce him to remain 
in the State, and not as a condition that he remove to the Indian country. 

Reading further from the same page : 

The object was to provide a penalty if he should become a wanderer and was 
inserted to encourage him to remain on the Mississippi lands for five years 
and to become a homesteader. 

I think that argument is clearly refuted by the statement of the 
Supreme Court in 119 United States. 

Mr. Miller. It is also refuted by all the other circumstances in 
the case, is it not? 

Mr. Bond. Yes; by every circumstance and every fact. I read 
from page 36 of said report : 

Under the pressure of the demand for the settlement of the unoccupied hinds 
of the State of Mississii)pi by emigrants from other States, the policy of the 
United States in respect to the Indian tribes still dwelling within its borders 
underwent a change, and it became desirable by a new treaty to effect so far 
as practicable the removal of the whole body of the Choctaw Nation, as a 
tribe, from the limits of the State to the lands which had been ceded to them 
west of the Mississippi River. To carry out that policy the treaty of 1830 
was negotiated. 

Reading further on page 37: 

It is notorious as a historical fact, as it abundantly appears from the record 
in this case, that great pressure had to be brought to bear upon the Indians 
to effect their removal, and the whole treaty was evidently and purposely 
executed, not so much to secure to the Indians the rights for which they had 
stipulated, as to effectuate the policy of the United States in regard to their 
removal. 

80223—15 4 



50 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

I now desire to call the attention of the committee to a statement 
of Mr. Cantwell's to the effect that the act of June 28, 1898, gave 
to the fourteenth-article claimants a right to citizenship in the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations without removal. Section 21 reads 
in part as follows : 

Said commissiou shall have authority to determine the identity of Choctaw 
Indians claiming rights in the Choctaw lands under article 14 of the treaty be- 
tween the United States and the Choctaw Nation concluded September 27, 1830, 
and to that end they may administer oaths, examine witnesses, and perform all 
other acts necessary thereto and make report to the Secretary of the Interior. 

That provision of the act does not confer upon the commission the 
right to enroll Mississippi Choctaws, but merely confers upon the 
commission the right to identify them and therefore, I take it, con- 
fers no right of enrollment or property right upon the Mississippi 
Choctaw without removal. 

I read further from the same section : 

No person shall be enrolled who has not heretofore removed to and in good 
faith settled in the nation In which he claims citizenship. Provided, however, 
That nothing contained in this act shall be so construed as to mlitate against 
any rights or privileges which the Missiissippi Choctaws may have under the 
laws or the treaties with the United States. 

That last proviso conferred no additional right upon the ISIissis- 
sippi Choctaw, but it simply held in statu quo or preserved any 
rights that he might have under the treaties between the tribe and 
the United States. 

Mr. Miller. Is it not a fair statement to say that that language 
means this, that nothing in the act will change in any degree the 
right or the status of the Mississippi Choctaws if under the treaties 
with the United States or under previous laws of the United States 
they have a right to citizenship in the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations without removal ; this does not put upon them the obligation 
to remove ? 

Mr. Bond. I think that is a correct statement of the law. As a 
further evidence of the correctness of the statement, I desire to read 
from section 11 of the act: 

Provided, That nothing herein contained shall in any way affect any vested 
legal rights which may have been heretofore granted by act of Congress, nor 
be so construed as to confer any additional rights upon any parties claiming 
under any such act of Congress. 

I desire now to call the committee's attention to a statement made 
by Mr. Cantwell to the effect that under the act of 1902 the rule of 
evidence was changed so as to make it compulsory upon claimants to 
establish the fact that they were descendants from those who had re- 
ceived a patent under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830. 
The Commission to the Five CiAnlized Tribes, in receiving proof un- 
der the fourteenth article of the treaty, did not follow strictlj^ the 
letter of the laAV, but they looked to the spirit of the law, and not only 
enrolled those who could prove that they were descendants of an 
ancestor who had received a patent under the treaty, but also en- 
rolled those who could show that their ancestors were entitled to 
rights under the fourteenth article of the treaty, even though their 
rights had been defeated by the agents of the Government or through 
any practices of citizens of Mississippi or otherwise, and the com- 
mittee so found at its last hearing. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 51 

After the passage of the act of 1902 the particular section in con- 
troversy was construed by the Attorney General, and the Attorney 
General held that that language was not intended to abridge any 
rights that claimants might have had prior to the passage of the act. 
The commission still continued to accept proof, even though no pat- 
ent had been issued to the ancestor. I will read a portion of the 
opinion of the Attorney General bearing on the question : 

Concerning said section 41 of tlie act 

Mr. Harrison, When was the opinion issued? 
Mr. Bond. The letter bearing the opinion was issued on November 
23, 1904, and I take it that the opinion was issued in the year 1904 : 

Concerning said section 41 of the act of July 1, 1902, the Attorney General of 
the United States, in an opinion rendered June 19, 1903, used the following lan- 
guage: 

" This agreement must, of course, be construed in the light of the circum- 
stances under which it was made, and with a purpose to ascertain the intention 
of the parties thereto. ^Manifestly the parties did not intend to abridge the 
rights of any person theretofore entitled by law to identification as a Missis- 
sippi Choctaw, but they did intend to permit the identification of some i>ersons 
who had not prior to that time been able to bring themselves within the require- 
ments of the rules establshed by the commission — persons the evidence of whose 
rights under the treaty of 1S30 could not be secured, but who the Government of 
the United States and the Choctaw Indians, ' in their generosity,' desired should 
share in the benefits arising out of the provisions of that treaty." 

He refers in the latter part of his opinion to the full-blood rule, 
and speaks of it as a generosity on the part of the Choctaws. 

Mr. Richardson. Mr. Bond, do you mean to say that the Dawes 
Commission, prior to the act of July 1, 1902, had proof and identifi- 
cation of claimants who were what are known as scrip claimants? 

Mr. Bond. I mean to say, Mr. Richardson, that I practiced before 
the Dawes Commission more or less from the time I graduated from 
laAv school. I never brought a Mississippi Choctaw case but what 
the Dawes Commission permitted any proof to show that the ancestor 
was entitled to comply with the fourteenth article of the treaty, and 
if you could show that the applicant was a descendant from an an- 
cestor who was entitled to comply with the fourteenth article of the 
treaty, and who was prevented, by any reason whatever, from com- 
plying therewith, they Avould admit the applicant to citizenship on 
such proof. 

Mr. Richardson. Is it not a fact that the commission had only 
decided, before the act of July 1, 1902, the identification of five indi- 
viduals between the time that the McKennon roll was submitted on 
March 10, 1899, and the act of July 1, 1902, was passed, and that 
those five individuals were all of one family? 

Mr. Bond. I am not prepared to say how many individuals the 
commission had passed on at tliat time. I have not looked up the 
record, but from the finding of the subcommittee last year and from 
the records that I have been able to investigate, the commission never 
confined proof to a patentee. It is true that immediately after the 
passage of the act of 1902 the commission construed it literally, but 
the matter was passed up to the Attorney (ieneral for a decision, and 
after tlie decision of 1904 the commission followed the holding of the 
Attorney General, and between 1904 and 1907 the department chiims 
to have reviewed all Mississippi Choctaw cases and to have applied 
the broad rule of the Attorney General to all such cases. 



52 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

Mr. TIuRLEY. There are a great many other decisions that we can 
submit to the committee wherein the same holding prevailed as in 
the Jim Gift case, if the committee cares to go further into those 
decisions. 

Mr. Bond. Mr. Cantwell has also denounced that part of the act 
of 1902 which permitted full bloods to be identified and enrolled 
Avithout proving that their ancestors were descendants from persons 
who complied or were entitled to comply with the fourteenth article 
of the treaty of 1830. I therefore desire to read from the report of 
the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes to the Secretary of the 
Interior for the year ending June 30, 190(), which bears on that 
question : 

The full-blood Indians living in the States of Mississippi, Alabama, and 
Louisiana remained innocuous in their huts and waited for the commission to 
take the initiative and t^eek them out. brinudng the offer of rich farms and com- 
fortable homes to their very doors, but they often stolidly refused to furnish 
any information whatever concerning; their ancestry. 

Claimants came from all parts of the country — from the Gulf to the Great 
Lakes, and from Oregon to Massachusetts — and literally submerged the com- 
mission with applications. 

It became apparent that the ignorant full blood, for whom Congress in- 
tended to provide, had nO record of his ancestry, and could not prove his 
rights under the law, and if required to do so would fail to receive the benefits 
of the legislation. In order that this might not happen, the following provision 
was embodied in the act of July 1, 1902. 

Then follows the provision with reference to the full-blood rule. 

I can not understand why counsel representing the proponents of 
the bill should so viciously denounce a rule which was a protection to 
the full bloods and which was merely a generosity on the part of the 
Chocta^v Nation. 

Mr. INIiLLER. What have you to say about this feature: Assuming 
that in the enactment of the two agreements the provision was de- 
signed to benefit the Mississippi Choctaws, it still required, in order 
to make application and prove their identity within six months that 
they had to remove to the Choctaw country west, and in your judg- 
ment did that requirement make it possible for any Mississippi 
Choctaw to take advantage of the provisions of the act? 

Mr. Bond. Yes, it did. 

Mr. Miller. Do you not think it is rather strange that no one was 
ever enrolled under that? 

Mr. BoxD. Perhaps they failed to remove, perhaps all applica- 
tions were made under former acts, and while the applicants received 
the benefit of the full-blood rale they were enrolled as of the acts 
under wdiich they applied, but that is a very reasonable provision 
and is easily explainable. 

In 1893 Congress passed an act looking to the allotment of the 
lands west. This act placed the fourteenth-article claimant on notice 
that there was going to be an allotment in severalty of the lands west. 
^ii 1896, under an act of Congress, a commission was sent to the 
Indian Territory for the purpose of making the rolls. That was 
an additional notice to the Mississippi Choctaws. In 1898 an act 
was passed closing the rolls, so far as applications to the members 
were concerned, but preserving the rights of the Mississippi Choctaws 
and providing for their identification. That act gave them an addi- 
tional opportunity to remove and an additional notice that the lands 



ENKOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 53 

were to be allotted in severalty. In 1900 there was an act passed 
by Congress, which reads as follows 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Miller, did I understand you to say that there 
were no full bloods enrolled under the act of 1902 ? 

Mr. Miller. Yes, sir. 

Mr. Hurley. That is not my understanding. 

Mr. Miller. That was the information furnished me by the Indian 
Office. 

Mr. Hurley. The cases that were pending then before the Com- 
mission to the Five Civilized Tribes were passed upon after that 
law, and they were given the benefit of that law, as shown in the 
Jim (jift decision, which* we have submitted here for the record. 
There were 24,000 more applications filed. 

Mr. Miller. Those applications were filed prior to July 1, 1902. 

Mr. Hurley. And passed on, or most of them, after that date. 

Mr. Miller. But no new applications were received under the act 
of July 1, 1902. 

Mr. Hurley. Xo, sir ; but, at the same time, the reason for that act 
was this, that there were so many applications pending from full 
bloods who could not prove their identity, and it was passed in order 
to give the commission the right to pass fa^•orably upon those full- 
blood cases, which was done under that act. 

Mr. Miller. You do not refer to any applications received under 
this particular provision? 

Ml-. Hurley. iS^o, sir; I do not refer to applications received, be- 
cause the applications had all theretofore been received — more than 
24,000 applications in all. Among those were the applications of 
the full bloods who could not theretofore prove their descent from a 
fourteenth-article claimant. Their cases were passed on after that, 
giving them the benefit of the full -blood rule, or the rule that could 
and did work favorably to the full-blood applicants who had their 
applications in at that time. 

Mr. Carter. Let me ask yon a question : Is it not a fact that this 
provision was placed in the 1902 agreement for the reason that the 
full-blood Indians, or many of the full-blood Indians, had been un- 
able to establish their identity as required by former laws? 

Mr. Hurley. That was the very purpose for which it was in- 
serted, because they had so many applications from Indians in Mis- 
sissippi who were full bloods and whom they wanted to pass upon 
favorably, but to whom they could not grant citizenship imder exist- 
ing laws because of the fact that those full bloods could not prove 
descent from fourteenth-article claimants. Then the so-called full- 
blood rule of evidence was made operative in favor of those appli- 
cants Avho could not prove their rights. In other words, they were 
admitted to citizenship without the proof of any right of citizenship. 

Mr. Balltxoer. How many were benefited by the decision in the 
Jim Gift case? 

Mr. Hurley. The Jim (lift case was not a full-blood case. That 
case was submitted in answer to your argument that no one except 
the descendant of a ])atentee was entitled under that act. Jim Cift 
was not the descendant of a patentee, but the descendant of a 
scripee. The Jim Gift case was the ruling case in aduiitting those 
who fould prove their descent from scripees under the act of 1902, 



54 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

and there were probably not more than 150 or 200 citizens of that 
character admitted. There were 162 in all, I think, admitted as 
Mississippi Choctaws. 

Mr. Richardson. Yon do not mean identified as Mississippi Choc- 
taws, but YOU mean finally enrolled? 

Mr. Hurley. Finally enrolled as Mississippi Choctaws 

Mr. Richardson. I think Mr. Miller's inquiry related to the num- 
ber of persons who imder the act of 1902 and this legislation were 
finally identified. There were about 2,550. 

Mr. Miller. I reallv referred to those admitted to citizenship 
under the act of July 1, 1902. 

Mr. Bond. I will read from the act of May 31, 1900: 

Provided, That any Mississippi Choctaw duly identified as such by the United 
States Conmiission to the Five Civilized Tribes sliall have the right, at any 
time prior to the approval of the final rolls of the Choctaws and Chiclcasaws 
by the Secretary of the Interior, to make settlement within the Choctaw-Chicka- 
saw country, and on proof of the fact of bona fide settlement may be enrolled 
by the said United States commission and by the Secretary of the Interior 
as Choctaws entitletl to allotment. 

This act gave the fourteenth-article claimants a further notice 
and a further right to enrollment, in addition to that conferred upon 
other applicants. The act of 1902, extended the time for applica- 
tions and for removal and the waiver of proof therein, applied to 
those Avho had theretofore been identified, or who had theretofore 
made application, and to all cases pending, and admitted without 
proof all full-blood claimants. Had it not been for this legislation 
practically none of the full bloods could have been enrolled, as the 
commission had theretofore reported that such applicants were un- 
able to furnish proper proof. Therefore the legislation was bene- 
ficial to the claimants. 

Mr. Carter. That extended the time six months for filing the ap- 
plications and for removal, which gave them a year for removal. 

Mr. Bond. Yes. 

Mr. Hurley. I think that you will probably find upon a close ex- 
amination of the facts surrounding that period that the reason why 
there w^ere no additional applications filed under that act was be- 
cause of the fact that all the applications of the Mississippi Choctaws 
were in at that time. All the persons whose names appeared on 
the McKennon roll were applicants at that time. 

Mr. Richardson. They had been conducting hearings in Missis- 
sippi from December, 1900, until October, 1901 — that is, hearing 
applications 

Mr. Hurley (interposing). And after having received all those 
applications, the commission found that the applicants were without 
the evidence to show their right to enrollment, and this act was 
passed in order to give the full bloods a right to enrollment without 
proof. 

Mr. Carter. It gave them six months after identification to re- 
move to Oklahoma, and it gave them six months' addition time in 
which to file their identification papers or to be identified. The act 
provides as follows: 

All i)ersons duly identified by the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes 
under the provisions of section 21 of the act of Congress approved June 28, 
189S, as Mississippi Choctaws entitled to benefits under article 14 of the treaty 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 55 

between the United States and the Choctaw Nation concluded September 27, 
1830, may at any time within six months after the date of their identification 
as Mississippi Choctaws by the said commission malve bona fide settlement 
within the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, and upon proof of such settlement to 
such commission within one year after the date of their said identification as 
Mississippi Choctaws shall be enrolled by such commission as Mississippi Choc- 
taws entitled to allotment as herein provided for citizens of the tribes, subject 
to the special provisions herein provided .is to Mississippi Choctaws, and s;(id 
enrollment shall be finul when approved by the Secretary of the Interior. The 
application of no person for identification as a Mississippi Choctaw shall be 
received by said commission after six months subsequent to the date of the 
final ratification of this agreement. 

Mr. Ballinger. The point I want to make in that connection is 
this, that the identification was not complete until approved by the 
Secretary of the Interior, and that in nionerons cases, perhaps in a 
majority of the cases, the claimants were not notified of their identi- 
fication until the six months' period had practically expired, and in 
some instances it had actually expired. 

Mr. Bond, I will say in answer to your statement that it was the 
duty of those people to remove to the Indian Territory. They had 
no right to remain in Mississippi and expect to be identified and 
enrolled and then remove thereafter. It was a condition precedent 
that they remove to the Indian Territory, and if they remained in 
the State of Mississippi awaiting identification, it was their fault. 
It was their responsibility and not the responsibility of the tribe or 
of the Government. I will read you what the Supreme Court of 
the United States has to say in reference to a condition precedent 
of that character. Bear in mind now that in the fourteenth article 
of the treaty there was no notice provided for. The claimants under 
that article simply retained the privifege of removing and simply a 
privilege of citizenship. There was no notice provided for in treaty, 
and there was no notice provided for under any other allotment act 
that was carried into effect. 

Mr. Ballixger. If they had removed prior to the time that they 
received notice of their identification, they would have been treatea 
as intruders. 

Mr. Carter. Mr. Ballinger, we have gone over that phase of the 
matter thoroughly, and I think the record shows that no person 
was ever dealt with as an intruder unless he failed to comply with 
the laws of the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Ballinger. There were a number of cases where they were 
removed. 

Mr. Caritr. There may have been some cases in which intruders 
were removed, but it was always for a violation of the laws of the 
Choctaw Nation. Citizenship claimants were not treated as in- 
truders. 

Mr. Bond. I read from the case entitled the Sac and Fox Indians 
of the Mississippi in Iowa r. Sac and Fox Indians of the Mississippi 
in Oklahoma, and the United States, reported in volume 220 United 
States lieports, at page 484. Now, mind you, in this case general 
notice was provided for the removal of the Sac and Fox Indians in 
order that they might enjoy their privileges of citizenship. I read 
from the opinion of the court on page 484 : 

The Court of Claims adds as yet a further reason for rejecting this claim 
that it does not appear how many of the Iowa Indians returuetl to Kansas to 



56 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

receive their annuities, but (therein varying from tlie statement of facts found), 
that it does ap])ear that some of them did. The course of the Government is 
sanctioned in ])rincii)le by the implication of the treaty of October 1. 1859 
(art. 7, 15 Stat., ;167, 469). That article recites the :,nxiety of the Sacs and 
Foxes, that all members of the tribes should share the advantages of the 
treaty, invite nonresident jnembers to come in and provide for notice to them, 
but adds the condilion that tho.se who do not rejoin and permanently reunite 
with the tribe within one year shall not have the benetit of any of the stipula- 
tions in the treaty contained. 

Now, the court in construing that section on page 487 uses the fol- 
lowing language : 

The fifth and last claim is for a share in proceeds of land ceded by the treaty 
of 1S59. * * * We do not see how the claim can be supported when the 
treaty itself provided that to benefit by it members umst rejoin the tribe, 
meaning the tribe in Kansas, within one year. It is suggested, to be sure, 
that the forfeiture, as it is called, was dependent upon notice being given as 
agreed in article 7, and that there is some evidence that notice was not given. 
The condition, however, was an absolute condition precedent to the acquisition, 
by persons not parties to the treaty, of any rights, if rights they can be called, 
notice or no notice. 

The only treaty to which the claimants were parties was the treaty 
of 1830, and it provided for removal, but made no provision for 
notice. So it was a condition precedent that they remove before 
they were entitled to citizenship. 

I now desire to call the committee's attention briefly to an argu- 
ment continually made on the floor of the House and the floor of 
the Senate to the eft'ect that the act of 1900 and the act of 1902 
repealed and abrogated the treaty of 1830, and I desire to say here 
and now that I am unable to understand how any lawyer can arrive 
at that conclusion. I say that for this reason: The court has held 
that it is necessary under the treaty of 1830 for the claimant to re- 
move in order to be entitled to citizenship rights in the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations. Now, pursuant to and in accordance with 
that decision of the court, Congress, in the act of 1900 and in the act 
of 1902, simpl}' extended the time within which the claimant could 
remove, and in no way abrogated, and in no way changed his right 
of removal under the treaty. He had the right of removal under 
the treaty, and Congress simply extended the time for removal under 
the act of 1900, with a limitation, and again in 1902 extended the 
time with an express limitation. Without a limitation on removal 
tribal affairs could never be settled. That was an absolute neces- 
sity on the part of Congress for the reason that the tribal form of 
Government was being abolished and the tribal affairs were being 
settled. 

Now, the claims of the Chickasaws have never been presented. I 
have examined volume after volume, containing hundreds upon hun- 
dreds of pages, but I have failed up to date to find a single argument 
in behalf of the Chickasaws, and I desire now to call tlie attention of 
the committee to the fact that the ChickasaAvs were bona fide pur- 
chasers for a valuable consideration; that they purchased after the. 
treaty of 1830 and took title subject to that treaty, but not subject to 
any equity that might have theretofore existed between the members 
of the Choctaw Nation, and not subject to any moral or political claim 
that have theretofore or thereafter existed between the members of 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CmLIZED TRIBES. 57 

the Choctatv Nation. I will read from the treaty with the Choctaws 
and Chickasaws of January 17, 1837. I read from article 1 : 

It is aj^reed by tke Choctaws tliat the Chickasaws shall have the privilege of 
forming a district withiu the limits of their country, to be held on the same 
terms that the Choctaws now hold it, except the right of disposing of it (which 
is held in common with the ChoctavA's and Chickasaws), to be called the Chicka- 
saw district of the Choctaw Nation; * * and the Chickasaw people to be 
entitled to all the rights and privileges of Choctaws, with the exception of par 
ticipating in the Choctaw annuities. 

Article 3 reads as follows: 

The Chickasaws agree to pay the Choctaws, as a consideration for these rights 
and privileges, the sum of $530,000. 

Now I desire to call the attention of the committee to the treaty 
of 1855, which changed the title and ownership of the Chickasaws and 
Choctaws. I read from article 1 : 

And pursuant to an act of Congress approved May 28. 1830. the United 
States do hereby forever secure and guarantee the lands embraced within the 
said limits to the members of the Choctaw and Chickasiiw tribes, their heirs and 
successors, to be held in coumion ; so that each and every member of either 
tribe shall have an equal undivided interest in the whole: Provided, hoioever. 
No part thereof shall ever be sold without the consent of both tribes, and that 
said land shall revert to the United States if said Indians and their heirs 
become extinct or abandon the same. 

The Chickasaws by purchase for a valuable consideration ac- 
quired title to lands in the Choctaw Nation, and, as I have said be- 
fore, the title was acquired subject to the terms and provisions of 
the treatv of 1830. Article 2 of the treaty of 1830 provided for the 
fee-simple title to the nation, to them and their descendants, so long 
as they existed as a nation and lived upon it. That provision was 
carried into the patent and the Chickasaw Tribe of Indians took 
title subject to that provision, and they are entitled to the benefits 
thereof. They are also entitled to the benefits of the fourteenth 
article of the treaty of 1830, which says that the claimants must re- 
move in order to be entitled to citizenship. Now, if the Chickasaw 
Tribe of Indians acquired rights under that treaty and under that 
patent. Congress at this time is unable to disturb or abrogate the 
title acquired under the patent and under the treaty. 

Mr. Miller. Do you think, Mr. Bond, any acts of Congress have, 
up to this time, been passed by which the Mississippi Choctaws have 
been able to become enrolled as citizens of the Choctaw-Chickasaw 
Nation who would not have been permitted to become enrolled had 
it not been for those acts? 

Mr. Bond. Yes; the time for removal Avas extended by the acts 
of 1000 and 1!)02, and proof waived as to fidl bloods by the latter 
act. The Chickasaws have by agreement with Congress waived cer- 
tain conditions; but those conditions were waived with express limi- 
tations, and those limitations have expired. For example, that pro- 
vision of the fourteenth article of the treaty which said "persons" 
fixed a limitation itself. A limitation was fixed upon the persons 
who were parties to that treaty. It was held by Judge Clayton 
that the Choctaw peo])le, continuing from year to year and from 
time to time to invite the heirs of those persons to come to the Choc- 
taw Nation, and continuing from time to time and from year to 
year to give the heirs of those persons citizenshij) rights, waited their 



58 ENROLLMENT IX THE FIV^E CIVILIZED TKIBES. 

right to the limitation of persons, and so continued that waiver 
until it became crystallized into law. The Chickasaws made prac- 
tically the same waiver when they executed the agreement of 1902, 
which permitted the heirs of those persons to enjoy citizenshp, but 
there was an express limitation in said agreement. A definite time 
was fixed within which they could exercise the right of removal. But 
the Chickasaws never waived the provisions of the patent which 
said those claimants must live upon the land, and the Chickasaws 
never waived the provision of the fourteenth article which said that 
they must remove in order to be entitled to citizenship, but reaf- 
firmed the provision of that article in the act of 1902 which said 
that they must remove. 

Mr. INIiLLER. Then the position that j^ou really take is that the 
Chickasaws have waived the right in several instances in the past 
and they have not waived it in respect of anything Congress ma}^ in 
the future do? 

Mr. Bond. The Chickasaws have never waived anything that Con- 
gress may in the future do, and the Chickasaws have never waived 
in the past the provisions of the fourteenth article that they must re- 
move in order to be entitled to citizenship. They have never waived 
the second article of the treaty which said that they must live upon 
the land, and they have not waived the provision in the patent which 
said they must live upon the land in order to preserve the title. If 
you will remember, Congress in 1902 agreed that a provision should 
be carried into the Choctaw and Chickasaw patents, exempting their 
allotment selections from taxes for a period of 21 years, or during the 
lifetime of the allottee. Congress afterwards removed the restric- 
tion upon portions of the allotment selections of the Choctaws and 
Chickasaws, and in the same act provided that all lands on which the 
restriction on alienation had been removed should become taxable. 
The State of Oklahoma under that act attempted to tax said lands. 
The tax was contested and the State court held that Congress had 
power to remove the exemption and make them subject to taxation. 
The case was appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States, 
and the court held that the condition in the patent exempting them 
from taxation was an absolute right, and that Congress was without 
authority to abrogate same. Now, if there was a right conferred 
upon the Chickasaws in consideration of the moneys they paid for 
the lands west, under the patent and under the treaty of 1830, could 
Congress now at this time abrogate that right? Congress has the 
right of legislation. Congress can repeal a law, but Congress can not 
abrogate a right acquired under the law. 

I read from Two hundred and twenty-fourth United States, at 
page (565. Choate against Trapp, secretary of the State board of 
equalization of Oklahoma. I read from the opinion of the court : 

On May 27, 1908, Congress passed a general act removing restrictions from the 
sale ami encumbrance of land held by Indians of the class to which theplaiutifiEs 
belong. Another section provided that lands from which restrictions had been 
removed should be subject to taxation. 

Thereupon proceedings were instituted by the State of Oklahoma with a 
view of assessing the plaintiffs' land for taxes. This they sought to enjoin, 
but their complaint was dismissed on demurrer. The case was carried to the 
supreme court of the State which held * * * that the United States, 
by vlrture of its governmental power over the Indians, could have substituted 
title in severalty for ownership in common without plaintiffs' consent and that, 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 59 

for want of a consideration, tbe provision that the land should be nontaxable 
was not a contract, but a mere gratuity which could be withdrawn at will. 
The court thereupon overruled plaintiffs' contention that they had a vested 
right of exemption which prevented the State from taxing the land at this 
time and dismissed their suit. 

There are many cases, some of which are cited in the opinion of the Supreme 
Court of Oklahoma (Thomas v. Gay, 169 U. S., 271; Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 
187 U. S., 565), recognizing that the plenary power of Congress over the Indian 
tribes and tribal property can not be limited by treaties so as to prevent repeal 
or amendment by a later statute. The tribes have been regarded as dependent 
nations, and treaties with them have been looked upon not as contracts, but 
as public laws which could be abrogated at the will of the United States. 

This sovereign and plenary power was exercised and retained in all the 
dealings and legislation under which the lands of the Choctaws and Chicka- 
saws were divided in severalty amoug the members of the tribes. For, although 
the Atoka agreement is in the form of a contract it is still an integral part of 
the Curtis Act, and, if not a treaty, is a public law relating to tribal prop- 
erty, and as such was amendable and repealable at the will of Congress. But 
there is a broad distinction between tribal property and private property, and 
between the power to abrogate a statute and the authority to destroy rights 
acquired under such law. 



But the exemption and nonalienability were two separate and distinct sub- 
jects. One conferred a right and the other imposed a limitation. * * * The 
right to remove the restriction was in pursuance of the power under which 
Congress could legislate as to the status of the ward and lengthen or shorten 
the period of disability. But the provision that the land should be nontaxable 
was a property right. 

* --^ *■ it: i): Hf If 

The patent issued in pursuance of those statutes gave the Indian as good a 
title to the exemption as it did to the land itself. 

■« H' ^ ^ Hf :^ it: 

It is conceded that no right which was actually conferred on the Indians 
can be arbitrarily abrogated by statute. 

Mr. Richardson. Must not a distinction be drawn as to the right 
of a patentee to enforce a condition made for his own benefit and 
one which is made for the benefit of the United States? Now, as I 
understand the case you have read from, the condition was made 
in there for the benefit of the patentee that his land should be exempt 
from taxation. In the treaty and in the patent a condition was made 
that the Indians should live on the land, and if they failed to do 
that the lands should revert back to the United States. There was 
a condition of their remaining on the land and that was a condition 
for the benefit of the United States. 

Mr. Bond. No; I do not so take it. The fourteenth-article claim- 
ants under that treaty received an allotment of land of (MO acres 
for the head of the family and 320 acres for each member of the 
family over 10 years of age, and 160 acres for each member under 
10 years of age. They accepted the benefit of that treaty. Then 
that treaty imposed a responsibility, the responsibility that if you 
want citizenship you must remove. They accepted the benefits under 
that treaty, and they must assiune the burdens. There was a bnrden 
placed there, the burden of removal, and when the Chickasaws ac- 
quired a right in that property they acquired it on the condition 
that no outsider, no citizen of the United States who had no right 
in that property without removal, should share in the fruits and 
benefits of it. 

Mr. Richardson. Then do you contend that the restriction of the 
patent that they should enjoy the property so long as they lived upon 



60 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES, 

it and the condition in the treaty and in the act of May, 1830, vhicb 
all contained the same requirement, that they were provisions put 
in there for the benefit of the Indian against the outsider and not 
for the benefit of the nation to secure forfeiture if they did not live 
on the land. 

Mr. BoM>. 1 he Indians who remained received a handsome patri- 
mony or they were entitled to an handsome partimony. They were 
entitled to receive greater allotments per capita than the Indians 
were afterwards allotted in Oklahoma, and when those rights were 
conferred upon them thei'e were certain conditions and certain re- 
quirements imposed for the l;enefit of those who did remove. Those 
who removed got nothing. They received no allotment selection in the 
State of Mississippi and therefore they had the right conferred upon 
them to preclude the others who did not remove from sharing in the 
fruits of their labor. The patent, the second article of the treaty, 
and the fourteenth article of the treaty are identical in that respect, 
because they say that no one who does not live on those lands shall 
have any benefits from them. The fourteenth article of the treaty, in 
accordance w^ith the other provisions of the treaty and of the patent, 
says that you must remove in order to enjoy the benefits of Choctaw 
citizenship- 
Mr. Miller. As I understand you, you maintain that the Indiar 
who remained in Mississippi thereafter were not citizens of the Choc 
taw Nation West? 

Mr. Bond. Yes. 

Mr. Miller. Under what theory did the ChoctaAV Nation West 
maintain a suit against the Government for the Indians who re- 
mained in Mississippi? 

Mr. Bond. They brought and maintained the suit for the nation 
and for those who claimed under the fourteenth article as individual 
members, for damages done to those individuals under the fourteenth 
article of the treaty, and if you will read the opinion in One hundred 
and second United States, the Cherokee Nation case, you will find 
that the Cherokee Nation brought practically the same kind of a 
suit except that in the place of individuals they said " Bands." They 
made the bands of Eastern Cherokees, who had refused to remove, 
parties to this suit. The nation recovered under that treaty and the 
opinion of the court is found in One hvmdred and second United 
States. 

Mr. Miller. That is all very true as to the Cherokee proposition, 
but the Cherokee Nation was one nation and the Choctaw was an- 
other, and the rights of each depend on the facts governing each. 

Mr. Bond. The act of Congress giving the right to sue in the 
Court of Claims calls them individuals. It recognizes that they 
had been damaged under the treaty of 1830. It did not repeal the 
act of 1830 which said that they must remove, or the treaty which 
said that they must live upon the land. Furthermore, the Chicka- 
saws had nothing to do with that judgment- They were not parties 
to that suit. They were not a joint tribe at the time when the dam- 
age accrued, anfl the Chickasaws did not receive one penny of that 
judgment. If there had been a waiver in that case it could not 
have applied to a nation that was not a party to the suit and who 
received none of the benefits under that judgment. 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 61 

Mr. Miller. Have yon that Supreme Court case in which the 
net proceeds decision was rendered? 

Mr. BoxD. Yes. 

Mr. Miller. The truth is, I do not know what language was 
used and I want to see tlie decision for my own information. 

Mr. Bond. I will say that in that suit the question of citizenship 
was not in controversy. It was simply a question of damages un- 
der a former treaty, and I will say that the treaty between the 
Cherokee Tribes of Indians and the treaty betw^een the Choctaws 
and the United States were identical as to the title. The only 
different provision in the treaty was that '' persons who claimed 
under this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw citi- 
zen, but if they ever remove they shall not be entitled to any por- 
tion of the Choctaw annuity." I would like to state to the com- 
mittee further that at the time this suit was brought practically 
all the individuals referred to in that case were then citizens of 
the Choctaw Xation. They had removed west and there were very 
few individuals remaining east at the time of the institution of the 
suit, if any. The fact that a person was a member of a tribe in 1830 
and Avas damaged undei" the terms of a treaty then existing would 
not preclude such person from suing for damages done thereunder 
on renewal of citizenship thereafter. It has been asserted that the 
fourteenth-article claimants are wards of the Government. 

It is contended that the fourteenth-article claimants being wards 
of the Government they are entitled to the protection of the ( Jov- 
ernment. and that it was the duty of the Government to remove them 
over to the Choctaw Nation West. 

Xow I will show conclusively by decisions of the Supreme Court 
of the United States that the fourteenth-article claimants who re- 
mained and now live in the State of Mississippi are United States 
citizens and not Avards of the Government. The United States hold 
over an Indian subject a dual guardianship, a guardianship of the 
person and a guardianship of his property. The guardianship of 
the person is relinquished when the Indian is made a citizen of 
the United States and subjected to State laAvs. The guardianship 
of the property is relinquished when the restrictions are removed 
on the alienation of the same. When an Indian is once made a 
citizen of the United States the Government is Avithout authority 
to reassert its guardianship of the person, and Avhen the restrictions 
.ore removed on the alienation of the ]3roperty the United States is 
AAithout authority to reimpose restrictions. Therefore when the 
guardianship of the person is relinquished by making an Indian a 
citizen of the United States and making him subject to State laAvs 
and Avhen the guardianship of the proi)orty is relinquished by re- 
moving the restrictions upon the alienation of the same, the Gov- 
ernment has no authority whatever over such Indian no more than 
it Avould have over any other of its sul)jects. 

Mr. Ballinger. Since 1830 has the GoA-ernment ever exercised 
a guardianship over a person in the Choctaw Nation? 

Mr. Bond. I think the TTnited States exercised a personal 
guardianship over the ChoctaAv Indians until they were made citi- 
zens of the ITnited States. If it did not exercise iifc, it had the right 
to exercise it. 



62 ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

I recad from 197 United States, 488, entitled " Matter of Heff." I 
read from the syllabus. 

The rofd.iiuizpd relation between tlie Government and the Indians is that of a 
superior and an inferior, whereby the latter is placed under the care of the 
foruier. The Government, however, is under no constitutional obligation to 
continue tlic relationship of guardian and ward and may, at any time and in 
the manner that Congress shall determine, abandon the guardianship and leave 
the ward to assume and be subject to all the privileges and burdens of one sui 
.iuris. 

>}: ^ H: 4£ sji :}; He 

Under the act of February 8, 1SS7 (24 Stat., 3SS), an Indian who has received 
an allotment and patent for land is no longer a ward of the Government, but a 
citizen of the United States and of the State in which he resides, and, as such, 
is not within the reach of Indian police regulations on the part of Congress, 
and this emancii)ation from Federal control can not be set aside without the 
consent of the Indian or the State, nor is it affected by the provisions in the 
act subjecting the land allotted to conditions against alienation and encum- 
brance, and guaranteeing him an interest in tribal or other property. 

:{: 9^ 4: 4: ^- ^ 4: 

It is said that commerce with the Indian tribes includes commerce with the 
members thereof, and Congress, having power to regulate commerce between 
the white men and the Indians, continues to retain that power, although it has 
provided that the Indian shall have the benefit of and be subject to the civil 
and criminal laws of the State and shall be a citizen of the United States and 
therefore a citizen of the State. But the logic of this argument implies that 
the United States can never release itself from the obligation of guardianship; 
that so long as an individual is an Indian by descent. Congress, although it 
may have granted all the rights and privileges of national and therefore State 
citizenship, the benefits and burdeub of the laws of the State may at any time 
repudiate this action and reassume its guardianship, and prevent the Indian 
from enjoying the benefit of the laws of the State, and release him from obliga- 
tions of obedience thereto. Can it be that because one has Indian and only 
Indian blood in his veins he is to be forever one of a special class over whom 
the General Government may in its discretion assume the rights of guardian- 
ship which it has once abandoned, and this whether the State or the individual 
himself consents? We think the reach to which this argument goes demon- 
strates that it is unsound. 

Reading further from page 509 : 

The fact that property is held subject to a condition against alienation does 
not affect the civil or political status of the holder of the title. 

Reading further: 

But it is. unnecessary to pursue this discussion further. We are of the opinion 
that when the United States grants the privileges of citizenship to an Indian, 
gives to him the benefit of and requires him to be subject to the laws, both 
civil and criminal, of the State, it places hrtu outside the reach of police regula- 
tions on the part of Congress; that the emancipation from Federal control thus 
created can not be set aside at the instance of the Government without the 
consent of the individual Indian and the State; and that this emancipation from 
Federal control is not affected by the fact that the lands it has granted to the 
Indian are granted subject to a condition against alienation and encumbrance, 
or the further fact that it guarantees to him an interest in tribal or other 
property. 

The district court of Kansas did not have jurisdiction of the offense charged, 
and therefore the petitioner is entitled to his discharge from imprisonment. 

Now, I will read authorities to show you that when the restriction 
is removed on the alienation of the land that Congress no longer 
has a guardianship of the property of the Indian. 

I read from 171 Federal Reporter, at page 907, entitled " United 
States V. Allen." 

In this case the Government of the United States authorized the 
institution of a number of land suits in the State of Oklahoma, and 



ENEOLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 63 

under the act of Congress approximately 30,000 land suits were 
brought in the United States court for the eastern district of Okla- 
homa. The lower court held that the United States was without 
jurisdiction; that the United States was without authority to main- 
tain those actions because the Indians of the Five Civilized Tribes 
had been made citizens of the United States. The trial court was 
reversed, because the trial court did not take into consideration that 
there was a dual guardianship, the guardianship of the person and of 
the property, and the circuit court of appeals, in reversing the trial 
court, held that the United States, under a specific act of Congress, 
had the authority to maintain those actions for the members of the 
Five Civilized Tribes, regardless of whether or not the restriction 
had been removed on the alienation of the property. Those cases 
were appealed to the Supreme Court of the United States and modi- 
fied and affirmed, the United States Supreme Court holding that the 
United States, even though under this specific act, was without 
authority to institute a suit for a member of the Five Civilized 
Tribes who had had the restrictions removed on the alienation of 
his allotment selection. I read from the syllabus of the case in the 
trial court: 

By act of March 3, 1901, amending section 6 of tlie general allotment act of 
February 8, 1887, and providing, inter alia, that "every Indian in the Indian 
Territory is hereby declared to be a citizen of the United States and is en- 
titled to all the rights, privileges, and immunities of such citizens," all mem- 
bers of either of the Five Civilized Tribes in such territory became and remain 
citizens, unaffected by the fact that by subsequent legislation their tribal ex- 
istence was continued to await the final disposition of the tribal property or 
that restrictions still exist on their power to alienate their lands after allotment 
in severalty ; and such being their political and civil status, with full power to 
maintain suits to protect their rights, the United States occupies no such rela- 
tionship of trust or guardianship toward them as entitles it to maintain in their 
behalf suits in its own name, to which they are not parties, to cancel convey- 
ances made by them of their allotted lands. 

I will now call your attention to the language of the court in One 
hundred and seventy-ninth Federal, at page 13, wherein the trial 
court was reversed : 

The provision of the act May 27, 1908, that " nothing in this act shall be 
construed as a denial of the I'ight of the United States to take such steps as 
may be necessary including the bringing of any suit * * * to acquire or 
retain possession of restricted Indian lands ***},-, cases where deeds, 
leases, or contracts * * * have been or shall be made contrary to law 
with respect to such lands prior to the removal therefrom of restrictions upon 
the alienation thereof, such suits to be brought on the recommendation of the 
Secretary of the Interior, without costs or charges to the allottees, the neces- 
sary expenses incurred in so doing to be defrayed from the money appropriated 
by this act" is more than a saving clause and when read in connection with 
the part of the section appropriating $50,000 to cover the expenses incurred in 
such litigation is an implied grant of power to maintain such suits and such 
power extends to suits relating to allotments which were freed from restrictions 
by section 1 of the act in respect to conveyances or contracts previously made. 

The circuit court of appeals thereby holding that this act con- 
ferred authority on the United States to bring suits for allottees even 
though the restrictions had been removed on the land. 

Mr. Ballixger. But the cause of action must have accrued prior 
to the time of the removal of the restrictions? 

Mr. Bond. It does not make any difference Avhether the cause of 
action accrued prior to the time of the removal of the restrictions; 
it depends on whether or not the land was restricted. 



64 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES, 

A number of cases went to the Supreme Court of the United 
States, and I will call the committee's attention to a few of the causes 
that were appealed. I will call your attention first to a case reported 
in 224 United States, at page 458, entitled " Goat v. United States." 

Heckmaii v. United States, ante, page 413, followed to effect that the United 
States has ciipacity to maintain a suit in equity to set aside conveyances of 
allotted lands made by allottee Indians in violations of statutory restrictions. 

The question in this case is: What are the restrictions in the'case of allot- 
ments to Seminole freedmen? 

The relations of the United States to Seminole freedmen by treaties and 
statutes reviewed, and held that the United States is entitled to maintain an 
action to set aside all conveyances made by Seminole freedmen of homestead 
lands, of surplus lands made by minor allottees, and by adult allottees if made 
prior to April 21, 1904 ; but that such an action can not be maintained as to con- 
veyances made by adult allottees after April 21, 1904. 

The restrictions were removed on the alienation of freedmen 
allottees in the Seminole Nation in April, 1914, 

One hundred and seventy-ninth Federal Reporter. 13, modified and affirmed 
as to this point. 

That is to say, it was modified so as not to include the land on 
which restrictions were removed, and affirmed with that modification. 

Now, I will read to the committee from the same report, at page 
448, entitled Mullen v. United States : 

The relations of the United States and the Choctaw Indians by treaties and 
statutes in regard to the allotment of lands and the restriction of alienation re- 
viewed, and held that where a person whose name appeared upon the rolls of 
the Choctaw Indians died after the r.itification of the agreement of distribu- 
tion and before receiving the allotment, there was no provision for restriction, 
but the land passed at once to his heirs : in such cases the United States can 
not maintain an action to set aside conveyances made by the heirs within the 
period of restriction applicable to homestead allotments made to members of 
the tribe during life. 

One liunilred and seventy-ninth Federal Reporter, 13, reversed as to this 
point. 

I M'ill sa^^ that the case reported in One hundred and seventy-ninth 
Federal, at page 13. was also reversed as to that point in cases re- 
ported in this volume at pages 471 and 413. 

The case of Bartlett et al. v. United States, reported in 203 Fed- 
eral Reporter, holds : 

It is not within the power of Congress to impose restrictions on the aliena- 
tion of land allotted to an Indian after the restrictions imposed by prior laws 
have expired. 

The guardianship of the person of the fourteenth article claimants 
was relinquished when they were made citizens of Mississippi and 
subject to the hiAvs of that State. The guardianship of the property 
of said claimants was relinquished when they were granted land 
without restriction on alienation. The relation of guardian and 
ward no longer exists between the United States and such claimants, 
and Congress is without power to com])el their removal and without 
authority to force a compliance vith the treaty. 

Encomium after encomium has been passed upon the Choctaws, 
both in the House and in the Senate, and also in the committee hear- 
ings, but I have been unable to find a single word of praise that has 
ever been said in behalf of the Chickasaws? 

I desire now to call your attention to a historical epitome of honor, 
of manhood, of hardihood, of courage, of bravery, and of endurance 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 65 

that will stir the heart of every Chickasaw. Pickett's History of 
Alabama, at page 298, reads: 

The Cliickasaws have never been conquered. They could not be defeated by 
De Soto with his Spanish army in 1541 ; by Bienville with his French and 
southern Indians in 1736; by D'Artaguette with his French army and northern 
Indians; by the Marquis De Vaudreuil with his French troops and Choctaws 
in 1752 ; nor by the Creeks, Cherokees, Kickapoos, Shawnees, and Choctaws 
who continually waged war against them. No ; they were the " bravest of the 
brave," and even when they had emigrated to the Territory of Arkansas, not 
many years ago, they soon subdued some tribes who attacked them in that 
quarter. 

I read from Cushman's History of the Choctaws and Chickasaws, 
at page 421 : 

As it is the Choctaws' boast, "They never In war shed an American's 
blood." so it is the Chickasaw boast, " They never in war shed a white man's 
blood of English descent." 

I read on: 

But Bienville, still chafing like an enraged bear under the mortification of 
his defeat by the brave and patriotic Chickasaws, which but increased his 
desire and determination to destroy them and blot out their very name, 
devoted the year 1739 to preparation for another exterminating invasion into 
the country of that seemiirgly indomitable people, and as :in intidductoiy step 
to the more successful accomplishment and full realization of his designs he 
sent an embassy in March, 1739, to the Choctaws to conciliate their good will 
and obtain their aid. And, strange as it may appear, Bienville secured 32 
villages out of 42 to the interests of the French. 

Bienville was greatly pleased, as with the assistance of the entire Choctaw 
Nation his long-cherished hopes of exterminating the Chickasaws would now 
be fully realized. But to make his second attack upon them a sure and com- 
plete sucess, without the possibility of failure, he adopted every measure 
possible that might strengthen his plans; therefore called into requisition all 
the available troops he could command not only in Illinois and Canada, but even 
obtained troops from France; and still, to be more sure, he chose a different 
route from that by way of the Tombigbee River to again invade the country 
of that little nation of heroes for the avowed purpose of their extermination. 

To the honor and praise of the Chickasaw people, it may truly be said: 
They fought single-handed and alone for 18 years against the French and their 
numerous Indian allies, kept them out of tlaeir country and maintained their 
independence to the last. Truly, history nowhere upon its pages, ancient or 
modern, records a nobler or braver little nation of people than the Chickasaws 
of North America. They defeated D'Artaguette and Bienville in 173G; Marquis 
of Vaudreuil in 1752, and Regio in 1753; and in 1771 sustained their authority 
over an extensive country, embracing the territory from middle Mississippi 
north to the mouth of the Ohio River, and from the Tombigbee River west to 
the Yazoo. 

It has been said that the Choctaws fought under Jackson at the 
battle of New Orleans. You will find on page 483 a commission 
issued by George Washington to the chief of the Chickasaws making 
him a captain of his militia. 

I read from page 522 : 

When the United States h:jd resolved to gobble up the Chickasaw country 
also, as they had the Choctaws' two years before, John Coffee was sent to the 
Chickasaw Nation to order Ben Reynolds (the Chickasaw agent) to imme- 
diately assemble the chiefs and warriors in council to effect a treaty with them. 

Three treaties (or rather articles) were drawn up, but were promptly re- 
.iected by the watchful and discerning Chickasaws. Then the fourth was 
written by the persistent Coffee; but with the following clau.se in.serted to 
catch the noble and influential chief, the incorruptible Levi Colbert, which read 
as follows : 

" We hereby agree to give our beloved chief, Levi Colbert, in consideration 
of his .services and expense of entertaining the guests of the nation, 15 sections 
of land in any part of the country he may select." 

80223—15 5 



66 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

" Stop ! Stop ! John Coffee." shouted the justly indignant chief in a voice 
of thunder, " I am no more entitled to tliose 15 sections of land than the poorest 
Chickasaw in the nation. I scorn your infnnious offer, clothed under the false 
hood of ' our beloved chief,' and will not accept it, sir." 

It is a historical fact that when the Chickasavrs purchased an in- 
terest in the ChoctaAv Nation West they were placed on a scope of 
country immediately adjacent to the plains Indian or the wild tribes. 
They stood on the very frontier and beat back and fought off the 
hostile raids and encroachments of the warlike Comanche, Kiowas, 
and Apache. They stood on the very threshold of danger and stayed 
the hand of the aggressive Cheyenne and brave Arapahoe. They did 
all this for the Choctaw tribe. They stood between the Choctaw 
Nation and danger. They purchased their rights for a valuable con- 
sideration. Could a bona fide purchaser have made a greater sac- 
rifice ? 

Now, gentlemen of the committe, is it your object and purpose to 
grant enrollment to the Mississippi Choctaw who did not have the 
courage, who did not have the heart, who did not have the nerve to 
face a wilderness and hostile tribes, and permit him to share in the 
benefits of a bona fide purchaser for value?. Are you going to do 
that, gentlemen ? Are you going to require the Chickasaws to answer 
for the debts, defaults, and miscarriages of the Choctaws, if there be 
any ? Do you believe the courts will exact it ? Do you believe justice 
demands it? 

In conclusion let me state that in 1820 the Choctaw Tribe of In- 
dians had a population of approximately 19,000 residing in the State 
of Mississippi and owning approximately 14,000,000 acres of land, 
4,000,000 acres of land were ceded to the United States for their 
lands west. Ten million acres were left in the State of Mississippi. 
Out of the 10,000,000 acres the claimants under the fourteenth arti- 
cle of the treaty were entitled to allotments and those allotments were 
of greater acreage than the recent allotments in the Choctaw and 
Chicksaw Nations. Those who went west went to preserve the title 
to the land that only 4,000,000 acres had been exchanged for, were 
armed in part w4th a bow and a quiver of arrows; were armed in 
part with a rifle, a bullet mold and a shot pouch. They were poorly 
clad and scantily provisioned. The entire path of their emigration is 
marked by the tombstones of their fallen. They made this sacrifice 
to preserve the title to the land west, and after privation, hardship, 
and endurance they conquered a wilderness, builded homes, estab- 
lished a form of government, and then invited their Choctaw 
brothers, who had remained east, who had received lands, moneys, 
and script to come and share what the}^ had preserved west; to come 
and enjoy the fruits of their sacrifices. 

From 3'ear to year they appropriated moneys in order that the 
Choctaws east might remove west; from year to year they pleaded 
with and entreated the Choctaws who had remained east to come 
west and enjoy the property they had preserved by their efforts. 
When Congress, in 1908, closed the rolls to applicants of their own 
people, they held them open for the Choctaws who remained east; 
in 1900 they held the rolls open for applicants who had remained 
east; in 1902 they held the rolls open for those who had remained 
east ; in 1902 they made a waiver as to proof for those who did not 
have the manhood and the courage to come west. Can you show me 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 67 

anywhere a finer example of generosity and philanthrophy? Can 
you show me anywhere a finer example of self-sacrifice by a tribe 
or by a nation ? Now, what has the United States Government done 
for the Choctaw Tribe? Congress promised the Choctaw Nation in 
1830 that no one should have title to their land west, preserved 
through trials and hardships, unless they lived upon it; Congress 
promised the Choctaw Tribe in 1830 that no one who refused to 
remove and assume the burdens of Choctaw citizenship and the re- 
sponsibilities of Choctaw government should be entitled to share in 
their lands west. In 1896, when the Choctaw government sur- 
rendered the right to make its own rolls. Congress promised the 
Choctaw Tribe that the rolls would be made in accordance with its 
treaties, laws, usages, and customs. Congress promised the Choctaw 
Nation in 1908, when it surrendered its institutions and its tribal 
form of government, which it had passionately clung to through 
patriotism and national pride, that the rolls, when approved by the 
Secretary of the Interior should be final, and the persons whose 
names appear thereon and their descendants thereafter born should 
alone constitute the tribe. In 1902, when the Choctaw Nation made 
additional concessions. Congress agreed that no person whose name 
did not appear upon the rolls as therein provided should be entitled 
to in any manner participate in the distribution of the common 
property of the tribe; that it would keep inviolate the treaties and 
would not permit anyone to share in tribal funds or tribal moneys 
except those whose names appeared upon the rolls. The Choctaw 
Nation has never broken faith with the United States Government; 
the Choctaw Nation has never violated a treaty with the United 
States Government; the Choctaw Nation has never breached an act 
of the Congress. Will the United States Government now keep 
faith with the Choctaw Nation ? 

Gentlemen of the committee, I am a Chickasaw by blood. My em- 
ployment was without solicitation or effort on my part. My pro rata 
share of the residue of the Chickasaw estate will little more than 
exceed my monthly salary as attorney for the tribe, but I would be 
pleased to-day if the entire affairs of both tribes could be settled 
and forever closed, that I might go home to my law practice, feeling 
that I had rendered some assistance to the committee and some serv- 
ice to my tribe. 

I am indebted to the members of the committee for many courte- 
sies. I appreciate the time and attention devoted by you to the in- 
terests of my tribe. I have implicit confidence in your judgment, 
and I feel assured that your report will be in accord with our laws, 
agreements, and treaties. 

o 



Part Nine 



REPORT ON H. R. 12586. 

January 2, 1915. 
Hon. John H. Stephens, 

Chairman House Committee on Indian Affairs^ 

Washington^ B.C. 
Sir : Your subcommittee appointed to investigate and report on 
H. R. 12586 begs leave to submit the following observations : 

A careful and painstaking investigation of all treaties, laws, and 
other records bearing on this claim, including hearings lasting from 
April 1, 1914, until August 27, 1914, was gone into by your com- 
mittee. 

H. R. 12586 directs : 

1. The Secretary of the Interior to enroll certain Mississippi Choc- 
taws upon the rolls of the Choctaw Nation in Oklahoma with a full 
participation in their tribal estate. 

2. To reopen the Choctaw rolls for the adjudication of 20,000 or 
more alleged claimants. 

There are some Choctaws still remaining in Mississippi who have 
persistently refused and successfully resisted all efforts of the Fed- 
eral Government and the Choctaw Nation to have them move west 
and affiliate with the tribe. 

The testimony before the subcommittee discloses many thousands 
of persons of doubtful descent, African and other, living in Missis- 
sippi and surrounding States, who have attempted to assert claims 
as Choctaw Indians. 

Such Indians of real Choctaw blood as still reside in Mississippi 
appear to take little interest in the claims asserted by their alleged 
attorneys. On the other hand, those claiming remote Indian blood 
and of doubtful descent have manifested much interest in being 
enrolled and sharing in a division of the Choctaw funds in Oklahoma. 

The contention of these latter seems to have been inspired and 
augmented by certain attorneys who have sent agents among these 
people advising them that they were Indians and taking contracts 
for their enrollment for a contingent fee of from 30 to 40 per cent 
of recovery, and in many instances a small cash retainer in addition. 

According to statements and admissions of these attorneys and 
their agents, two firms alone, those of Cantwell & Crews, of St. Louis, 
Mo., and Ballinger & Lee, of Washington City, D. C, and Ardmore. 
Okla., hold contracts with 15,596 individuals, carrying provisions for 
fees aggregating $10,882,815. 

The testimony further shows that a syndicate for the purpose of 
securing the enrollment of Mississippi Choctaws and a participation 
in the tribal estate of the western Choctaws has been formed under 

141 



142 ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TEIBES. 

the name "The Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co.," capitalized at 
$100,000, $25,000 of which has been paid in and used. The directors 
of this corporation are S. L. Hurlbut, of El Campo, Tex. ; H. Master- 
son and W. A. Smith, of Houston, Tex. ; and T. B. Crews and H. J. 
Cantwell, of St. Louis, Mo. 

This claim of the Mississippi Choctaw attorneys for enrollment of 
their clients and participation in the Choctaw Nation's estate is by 
no means a new contention. The claim was, under direction of law, 
fully adjudicated by the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes 
(House boc. 274, 55th Cong., 2d sess.) and afterwards by the Federal 
court, to which appeal was taken (Jack Amos et al. v. The Choctaw 
Nation, Decisions of United States courts in Indian Territory, 465), 
both decisions being adverse to the Mississippi Choctaw contention 
for enrollment. 

In rejecting the claim of nonresident Mississippi Choctaws the 
Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes said in part : 

This historical review of the acquisition of this territory by the Choctaw 
Nation and Its subsequent legal relations to it makes it clear in the opinion of 
this commission that the Mississippi Choctaws are not under their treaties en- 
titled to all rights of Choctaw citizenship except an interest in the Choctaw 
annuities and still continue their residence and citizenship in Mississippi. 
(House Doc. 274, 55th Cong., 2d sess.) 

In affirming the decision the United States District Court for the 
Central District of Indian Territory closed its decision with the fol- 
lowing paragraph : 

To permit men with, perchance, but a strain of Choctaw blood in their veins, who, 
65 years ago, broke away from their kindred and their uatioQ, and during that 
time, or the most of it, have been exercising the rights of citizenship and doing 
homage to the sovereignty of another nation, and have become strangers to the 
people, to reach forth their hands from their distant and alien homes a ad lay 
hold on a part of the public domain, the common property of the people, and 
appropriate to their own use, would be unjust and inequitable. It is therefore 
the opinion of the court that the absent Mississippi Choctaws are not entitled 
to be enrolled as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. The action of the Dawe.s 
Commission is therefore aflJi-med and a decree will be entered for the Choctaw 
Nation. (Jack Amos et al. v. the Choctaw Nation, Decisions of United States 
courts in Indian Territory, 465.) 

An appeal was taken from these decisions by the attorneys for the 
Mi.'^sissippi Choctaws to the Supreme Court of the United States and 
the Jack Amos case was dismissed upon motion of the attorneys for 
the Mississippi Choctaws (190 U. S., 873). 

Several years subsequent to the date of these decisions excluding 
the Mississippi Choctaws from enrollment this matter was again 
taken up and readjusted by the legally constituted authorities of 
the Federal Government and the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
in Okhthoma, by which agreement the Mississippi Clioctaws were 
given additional time for identification and establishment of bona 
fide residence in the Choctaw Nation in Indian Territory. (Supple- 
mental agreement, "An act to ratify and affirm the agreement with 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes of Indians, etc.," approved Julv 
1, 1902.) 

The Choctaw Nation in Oklahoma has dealt justly and liberally 
with the Mississippi Choctaws, always granting them full citizenship 
in their nation with all emoluments thereto whenever they would 
agree to affiliate with the tribe, and the Choctaw Nation in Okla- 



ENROLLMENT IN THE FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 143 

homa is under no legal, equitable, or moral obligation to enroll the 
Mississippi Choctaws as citizens of the tribe in the West at this time. 

By the agreements negotiated between the Federal Government 
and the Choctaw Nation all native western Choctaws were recjuired 
to be on the reservation by June 28, 1898, or stand debarred from 
enrollment and participation in the tribal estate forever thereafter, 
and this rule has been strictly adhered to. 

The time for establishment of residence on the reservation was 
extended to the Mississippi Choctaw claimants until July 1, 1903, 
giving the Mississippi Choctaws five years to move on the reserva- 
tion after the time for establishment of such residence had been closed 
to the native Choctaws. 

After 11 years were consumed by the Commission to the Five 
Civilized Tribes in making up the rolls of the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Nations such rolls were affirmatively closed by action of Con- 
gress on March 4, 1907. 

The rolls of the Choctaw Nation were held open to the Mississippi 
Choctaws from 1830 until March 4, 1907, giving the Mississippi 
Choctaws 77 years in which to complete enrollment with full benefits 
of citizenship. 

The Federal Government as such is neither legally nor equitably 
obligated to enroll Mississippi Choctaws with the Choctaws west, and 
is under only such moral obligation to the Mississippi Choctaws as 
is due to dependent North American Indians who were originally 
occupants and owners of the soil and who have been deprived of their 
patrimony by white settlers. 

The passage of H. R. 12586 would completely upset and undo 11 
years of careful, painstaking work of the Interior Department in 
settling the affairs of the Five Civilized Tribes, turn the wheels of 
progress backwards for more than 20 years, and, as has been said by 
President Taft, " open up a Pandora's box of troubles, which the life 
of the present generation might not see closed." 

The passage of H. R. 12586 would doubtless result in stupendous 
claims of millions of dollars against the Federal Government on the 
part of the Oklahoma Choctaws because of a division of their funds 
among persons whom the Federal commissions and Federal courts 
have decided were not entitled thereto. 

Its passage would lend encouragement to grafting attorneys with 
contracts for enormous attorneys' fees, running into millions of 
dollars, and hold out inducement for procuring additional contracts 
from spurious claimants. 

Youi' subcommittee therefore recommends that the Harrison bill 
(II. R. 12586) be not favorably reported by the House Committee on 
Indian Affairs. 

Respectfully submitted. 

C. D. Carter, Chairman. 
J. D. Post. 
RoBT. P. Hill. 
P. P. Campbell. 



Part Ten 



REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR ON 
THE HARRISON BILL (H. R. 12586). 



The Secretary of the Interior, 

Washington, January 8, 1916. 

My Dear Mr. Stephens : I have the honor to refer herein to a com- 
munication of August 12, 1914, from Hon. C. D. Carter, then acting 
chairman of th*^ Committee on Indian Affairs of the House of Repre- 
sentatives, with which was inclosed a copy of H. R. 12586, entitled 
"A bill to reopen the rolls of the Choctaw-Chickasav,' Tribe and to 
provide for the awarding of the rights secured to certain persons by 
the fourteenth article of the treaty of Dancing Rabbit Creek, of date 
September 27, 1830." He also referred to H. R. 4536 and requested 
that I consider the two bills together and make a report thereon. 

Upon examination of H. R. 4536, I find that said bill is identical 
with H. R. 19213, introduced by Mr. Harrison of Mississippi in the 
Sixty-second Congress, second session, upon which last-mentioned 
bill the department submitted to your committee a report dated July 
2, 1912. H. R. 12586, introduced in the present Congress by Mr. 
Harrison, is a similar bill to the above-mentioned bills except that in 
said H. R. 12586 an additional paragraph is included in section 2 to 
provide for the enrollment of all persons who were identified as Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws by the Dawes Commission in its report of March 
10, 1899, commonly known as the McKennon roll, and of all persons 
identified as Mississippi Choctaws by the Dawes Commission from 
March 10, 1899, to March 4, 1907, whose identification was approved 
by the Secretary of the Interior but whose names did not appear on 
the final citizenship rolls of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. 

The claims of Mississippi Choctaw Indians to recognition as 
citizens of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma and to share in the 
property of said Nation are based upon article 14 of the treaty of 
September 27, 1830. (7 Stat. L., 335.) Pursuant to the terms of the 
treaty, a large number of Choctaws were transferred from Mississippi 
to the country west, later known as Indian Territory. These Choc- 
taws who 80 removed and their descendants now constitute the 
main body of what is known as the Choctaw Nation. There were, 
however, a considerable number of Choctaws who remained behind in 
Mississippi, some of them under the provisions of article 14 above 
mentioned. 

Said article 14 provided that the persons who claimed thereunder 
shouhl not lose the privilege of a Choctaw citizen, but if they ever 
removed were not to be entitled to any part of the Choctaw annuity. 
The Indians who remained behind under the provisions of said article 
14 received either land in Mississippi or scrip, which gave the appli- 
cants the right to enter pubUc lands in certain Southern States. A 

75741—15 



part of said scrip, however, was later commuted by a money payment. 
Some of the fourteenth-article claimants later made their way west 
and joined the main body of the tribe in the Indian Territory. The 
Choctaw Council by various acts recognized the right of said absentee 
Mississippi Choctaws to remove to the nation, and actually invited 
them to do so. : 

Under the provisions of the Atoka agreement with the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Tribes contained in the act of Congress of June 28, 
1898 (30 Stat. L., 495), the supplemental agreement contained in the 
act of July 1, 1902 (.32 Stat. L., 641), and later acts of Congress for 
the purpose of carrying out the provisions of said agreements, the 
claims of individual Mississippi Choctaw Indians to be identified and 
to be enrolled as entitled to share in the property of the Choctaw 
Nation were ful'y considered by the Commission to the Five Civilized 
Tribes and by the department after full hearing, at which the claim- 
ants had ample opportunity to present all the evidence whicli they 
could procure in support of their claims. Very few claimants were 
able to prove descent from an ancestor who received or applied for 
benefits under the provisions of article 14 of the treaty of 1830. 

The history of the Dawes Commission enrollment work relative 
to Mississippi Choctaw claimants is very fully set out in a communi- 
cation of April 14, 1914, from William O. Be; 11, at one time secretary 
of the commission to the Five Civilized Tribes. A copy thereof is 
inclosed for your information. 

For your further information as to the history of the Mississippi 
Choctaw claims and of the department action in the preparation of 
the final rolls there is inclosed a copy of department letter of July 2, 
1912, to the chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs of the 
House of Representatives. 

Judge William H. H. Clayton in his decision in the case of Jack 
Amos V. The Choctaw Nation, a copy of which may be found in the 
appendix of the -annual report of the Commission to the Five Civilized 
Tribes for the fiscal year ended Juno ,30, 1901, said that no treaty or 
acts of theX^hoetaw Council or of any officer of the Choctaw Council 
since the treatyof 18.'^0 could be cited, or at least he had not found 
them, whereby any right- or privilege had been conferred, granted, 
or recognized i^ or to a Mississippi Choctaw so long as ho remained 
away from his ; people, and that no right was recognized or conferred 
upon -Buch ai^oixt- Indian except upon the condition that ho should 
remove to. t^hanfition, and the right was not to be consummated or 
enjoyed until act\ial removal. 

Mississippi. ,-Cho.c'iaw. Indians who, while the opportunity was 
theirs under the ^privileges accorded them, refused to en^grate with 
the tril)et;e..tiket iiiew ^country west, and who never shared in the bur- 
dens and hgfrdsbips of the pioneer life incident to the establishment 
of the new trilal government west of the Mississippi, have at this 
late date (noyc:. that the tribal property of the Choctaw Nation made 
valuable- by the emigrants is being divided per capita among the 
enrolled rw;i>gui;T<l_ citizens of the nation) no equitable right to 
share in said- pi^^p^'i'tyv- :. 

With re!^|>^vt : to: the persons who were identified by the Dawes 
CommissiPTL.asiMi^issippi Choctaws under the provisions of the act 
of Congress of June 28, 1898 (30 Stat. L., 495), but who- failed to 
remove and make settlement in the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, 



as required by the act of Congress of July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. L,, 641, 
sees. 41, 42, 43, and 44), it may be said that, irrespective of their 
unfortunate condition of poverty and ignorance, there is no ground, 
legal or equitable, for holding the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
responsible for the failure of said identified persons to comply with 
the law as to removal and settlement. No obligation rested upon 
the United States to provide ineans for the removal of such Indians. 

Referring to the class of claimants whose names were contained in 
an identification roll submitted by the Commission to the Five 
Civilized Tribes on March 10, 1899, but never approved by the Secre- 
tary of the Interior, your attention is invited to the fact that the 
commission soon recognized the inaccuracy and incompleteness of 
that roll and requested the department to disregard it and to return 
the same to the commission. In order that there might be no doubt 
as to the standing of said roll, it was disapproved by the department 
on March 1, 1907. The larger part of the persons whose names were 
contained on that disapproved roll, were afterwards placed on the 
approved identification rolls, and those who compUed with the law 
as to removal and settlement were enrolled on the final rolls of 
Mississippi Choctaw Indians. 

In the investigation and examination of Mississippi Choctaw claims 
made in 1900 and the years following by the Commission to the Five 
Civilized Tribes every effort that was possible to be made was made 
by said commission to reach all persons who had any equitable claim 
to recognition as Mississippi Clioctaws, and especially to find those 
who were full-blood Choctaw Indians. 

H. R. 4536 and 125S6 in effect provide, so far as the Mississippi 
Choctaw claimants are concerned, a general reopening of the rolls of 
the Choctaw Nation, necessitating a review of all the cases which had 
been adversely decided by the United States courts, the Department 
of the Interior, and the Choctaw and Cliickasaw Citizenship Court, as 
well as the consideration of claims not lieretofore presented or con- 
sidered, and empower the Secretary of the Interior to determine the 
rights of the claimants upon such evidence as may be produced by 
the applicants, without regard to any adverse judgment or decision 
heretofore rendered by an\ court or commission to the Five Civilized 
Tribes, or the Department of the Interior, and without regard to any 
condition or disability heretofore imposed by any act of Congress. 

The records of the department show that Mississippi Choctaw 
claimants have been to an unusual extent the victims of numerous 
extortionate contracts, and the correspondence in many cases indi- 
cates that contracts were obtained through misrepresentations as to 
the facts, and in some cases that such contracts were obtained from 
claimants who believerl that the persons obtaining the contracts 
were (lovernment agents. Your attention i^ inv^ited to the report 
of Inspector McLaughlin, of this department, which report appears in 
print m tlie Congressional Record of July 10, 1914, commencing on 
page 1,3022. 

Referring to section of said bills, I am of the opinion that, in view 
of the large amount of tribal property yet to be disposed of and of 
other matters affecting the tribes, it would be inadvisable to abolish 



'4^ 

the tribal organization of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations at the 
present time. 

In view of the facts as presented to me, I am of the opinion that 
no legislation should be enacted for the reopening of the rolls of the 
Chotcaw Nation for the benefit of the Mississippi Choctaw claimants. 
Very truly, yours, 

Franklin K. Lane. 
Hon. John H. Stephens, 

Chairman Committee on Indian Affairs, 
House of Representatives. 



WASHINGTON I GOTKBNUBNT PBINTINO OITICS : IMS 



Part Eleven 



I * 

I 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL 



HEARINGS 



BEFORE THE 



COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 



OF THE 



HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 



PAKT 4 




WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 

ISM 



COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS. 
Sixty-Fourth Congress. 



John H. Stephens, 
Charles D. Carter, Oklahoma. 
Thomas F. Konop, Wisconsin. 
Carl Hayden, Arizona. 
Lewis L. Morgan, Louisiana. 
WiLLUM H. Murray, Oklahoma. 
Denver S. Church, California. 
Charles M. Stedman, North Carolina. 
WiLLUM J. Sears, Florida. 
C.[C. Bill, Washington. 
John N. TttLMAN, Arkansas. 
Harry L. GanDy, South Dakota. 



Chairman, Texas. 

Phtlip p. Campbell, Kansas. 
Patrick D. Norton, North Dakota. 
Samuel H. Miller, Pennsjlvania. 
Stephen Wallace Dempsey, New York. 
Homer P. Snyder, New York. 
Royal C. Johnson, South Dakota. 
Franklin F. Ellsworth, Minnesota. 
Benigno C. Hernandez, New Mexico. 
James Wickersham, Alaska. 



James V. Townsend, Clerk. 

Paul N. Humphrey, Assistant Clerk. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



STATEMENT OF HON. SCOTT FEEEIS, A REPEESENTATIVE 
IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA. 

Mr. Ferris. Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I have 
been sick in bed for two daj's v. ith the grippe and shall not try to 
speak very loud and will not continue very long. I wish to apologize 
to you, Mr. Cliairman, and to the committee for the consumption of 
so much time on Oklahoma matters, but in the height of good humor 
I must say that in this instance it is of the chooshig of the gentleman 
from Mississippi rather than ourselves. He comes here and attacks 
a provision in this bill which is trying to carry out two solemn treaties 
made with the Oklahoma Indians for the payment to them of their 
own money. 

Now, might I for a moment, gentlemen, say one word regarding the 
historical phase of this matter so that we may get started off clearly. 

Ninety-six years ago all of the Choctaw Indians, approximately 
19,000 in number, lived in the State of Mississippi. The treaty of 
1820 was made to bring about their removal. It was entered into, 
signed up, and in all things agreed to. Under that immediately 
15,000 of the approximately 19,000 Choctaws removed to Oklahoma 
in obedience to the treaty and in obedience to the wishes of the Gov- 
ernment. They acted as wards of the Government, with the Govern- 
ment as the supervisor. Approximately 4,000 of the 19,000 remained 
in Mississippi. 

In IS-'iO Congress made an additional treaty with these Indians, 
still seeking to get them to remove to Oklahoma with their brethren, 
and in that treaty they put in the fourteenth article of the treaty 
which is the sole and only claun that tiie Mississippiiins have ever 
made to any rights for those who remained in Mississip])i. Let me 
read it : 

AitT. 14. Each Choctaw head of a family being desirous to remain and become a 
citizen of the States shall be permitted to do so by signifying his intention to the 
agent within six months from the ratification of this treaty, and he or she shall there- 
upon be entitled to a reservation of one section of (ilO acres of land, to be bounded l)y 
section lines of survey; in like manner shall be entitled to one-half that quantity for 
each unmarried child which is living with him over 10 years of age and a quarter 
section to such child as may be under 10 years of age, to adjoin the location of the 
parent. If they reside on said lands intending to become citizens of the States for five 
years after the ratification of this treaty, in such case a grant in fee simple shall issue; 
said reservation shall inchuh; the present improvement of the head of the family or 
a portion of it. Persons who claim luider this article shall not lose the privilege of a 
Clioctaw citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any portion of the 
Choctaw annuity. 

Now the last two lines of Article XIV is the sole tiling upon which 
the Mississippians base tlieir claim. There can be no otner claim. 
They do not assert any other claim. It is all there is to it, so let us 
pass to that one proposition. 



4 INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 191*7. 

Between the passage of this treaty of 1830 and 1855, 8,400 of these 
4,000 that remain(>(l went to Okhxhoma, were enrolled, and m all 
things became nienil)ers of the Oklahoma band of Indians, leaving 
approximately 700 behind. These 700 Indians had the right to go 
ttnd take a section for every head of a family; to take a half sec- 
tion for every child over 10 years of age; to take a quarter section 
for every child under 10 years of age. I hold before you a complete 
list of Indian names of 143 families, taken from roUs of the Indian 
Office — it was then under the War Department. There are the names 
of 143 families who took their patent and deed just exact ly as Con- 
gress intended them to. 

Mr. (Barter. That was the heads of families, the heads of families 
and children, too? How many does it include all told? 

Mr. Ferris. Only 143 heads of families, but there are some others 
in addition. I present them to the committee so there can be no 
mistake about who they are, what they are, and that they actually 
received it. 

List nf Mississippi Choctaw Indians to whom patents were issued for land under the pro- 
visions of art. U of the treaty of Sept. 27, 18-30 (7 Stat. L., 3S3-3S5). 



Patentee. 



Date of 
patent. 



Remarks. 



Ab-be-ho-kah 

Afa-ma-tubbe 

Agnes 

Ah-be-nah-tubbe 

Ah-chee-non-tubbe. . 
Ah-clmk-mah-tiibbe. 

Ak-kah-po-tubbo 

Ah-la-mo-tubbe 

Ah-no-sa-cubbe 

Ah-num-po-lah 

Ah-to-nee 

Ah-to-ble-cha 

Ah-took-lah-ho-nah. . 

Ah-pa-sah-too-nah 

Ah-woon-te-nah 

Ah-wan-to-nah 

Al-la-tah-ho-yo 

Amah 

Anolah 



A-nok-ae-tubbe. . 

Anthle-Honah 

Asholata , 

Aira-ah-c'ho-mah . 
Aun-to-tubbe. . .. 

Bah-ne-tubbe 

Beams, Betsey... 



Bell, Robert 

Bo-le-ho-nah , 

Brashears, Alexander . 
Brashears, Delilah 



Brashears, Rachel , 

Brashears, Zadock (commonly called 
Zadock, jr.). 

Bryant, Louis , 

Buchanan, Charles , 

Buckles, Betsy 

By-ana ". 

Cah-mul-le ■. , 

Carney . Jeremiah 

Cha-fa-no-na 

Chanahajo (alias Oake Chanahajo) 

Cha-tamboe 

Che-caw (or Che-caugh) 

Che-mah-yo-ka 

Chuck-po-tubbe 

Christie, William 



Jan. 13, 1846 
Sept. 3,1846 
Sept. 9,1846 
Jan. 20,1846 
Sept. 7,1846 
Aug. 18,1846 

....do 

Dec. 4, 1845 
14,1846 

24. 1845 
4,1845 
5, 1846 

Sept. 4,1846 
Sept. 7,1846 
Dec. 24,1845 

30. 1846 
13, 1846 

3, 1846 
4, 1857 



Oct. 
Dec. 
Dee. 
Jan. 



Mar. 
Jan. 
Sept. 
Feb. 



Nov. 3, 1837 
Sept. 4,1846 
Sept. 3,1846 
Oct. 14,1846 
Dec. 24,1845 
Aug. 18,1846 
Nov. 23, 1846 



Dec. 14,1846 
Jan. 5, 1846 
Sept. 17,1841 
Dec. 8, 1842 



June 21,1841 
Mar. 29,1842 

Jan. 29, 1S40 
Aug. 20,1841 
Feb. 17,1838 
Feb. 3,1847 
13, 1846 
13, 1848 
3, 1846 
14, 1846 
9, 1846 
5, 1846 

....do 

Dec. 28,1846 
Sept. 21, 1841 



Jan. 

Apr. 

Sept. 

Dec. 

Sept. 

Jan. 



And 2 children over 10 years of age and 3 children 
under 10 years of age at date of treaty. 



In hor own right and to "Vicey," her child over 
10 years of age, and to "Amy" and "Kitty," 
her children under 10 years of age at date of 
the treaty. 



In hor own right and for her 3 children over 10 
and hor 3 children under 10 years of age at date 
of the treaty. 



INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL, 191*7. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians to whom patents were issued for land under the pro- 
visions of art. U of the treaty of Sept. 27, 1830 (7 Stat. L., 33S-3S5)— Continued. 



Patentee. 



Cobb, Samuel 

Con-ohi-hee-tubbe 

Con-na-ho-te-mah 

Coon-oou-tah-te-mah . 

Cun-e-mah-tubbe 

Ciin-oon-tam-be 

Daniel 

Durant, P'isher 

Durant, Pierre 

Durant, Risseze 

E-ah-pil-lah 

Eahambee 

Eahoo-ka-chubbee. . . 

Eha-hah-tomah 

Eia 

Ela-ba-tubbe 

Do 

Elah-chubbe 

Ela-pahoka 

Ela-nam-tubbee 

Eli-o-tubbe 

I-^liza 

E mah-ho-to-nah 

Emanoatona 

E-me-sha 

E-minta-ham-be 

E-mok-lam-be 

E-muck-a-to-na 



Ey-ya-tubbe 

E-ya-la-ko-noh 

Falissa 

Feb-e-mah-ho-nah. 
Fe-le-ka-chubbe. . . 
Foster, William. .. 



Garvin, Henry 

Garwin, Benjamin W. 



Graham, Susan or Susaima. 



Ha-cubbe 

Ila-la 

Hall, William 

Hancock, Caroline D 

Hancock, Tubal B 

Hancock, Mary M 

Hancock, William M , 

Hardaway, Hartwell 

Harris 

Heccatambe , 

He-o-te-mah 

Hin-o-la 

Hi-a-tubbee 

Uoecalahoma 

Ho-ka 

Hok-la-homa 

Kok-o-lo-chubbe 

Homer,. John 

Hotaiahhona 

irotah 

Ho-ta-mah 

Ho-te-mah-lah 

llo-te-mah 

Ilo-te-nah-cbiibbe " 

Uotiah, Abbah (otherwise written 
Tloter). 

Ho-t i-yah 

Ho-to-mah 

Ho-to-man-ka 

Ho-tubbe .' 

Hoo-tubbe 

Howell, Calvert (alias Calvin H.) 

Hoyo 

Ho-yubbe 

I-arn-in-tubbce 

I-ath-le-pah 

I-bah-osh-tah 



Date of 

patent. 



Mar. 20, 
Dec. S, 
Jan. 20, 
Oct. U, 
Aug. 18, 
Sept. 2, 
Apr. 13, 
Apr. 12, 
Mav 13, 
Dec. 14, 
Dec. 24, 
Feb. 3, 

do... 

Oct. 14, 
Feb. 3, 
Sept. 7, 
Dec. 14, 
Aug. 18, 
Feb. 3, 
Sept. 9, 
Mar. 30, 
Sept. 4, 
Jan. 13, 
Sept. 9, 
Jan. 13, 
Sept. 8, 
Oct. 14, 
Aug. 12, 



1846 
1845 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1848 
1848 
1848 
1846 
1845 
1847 



1846 
1847 
1847 
1846 
1846 
1847 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1845 



Dec. 21,1837 
Sept. 7,1846 
Sept. 9,1846 
Mar. 30,1846 
Dec. 1,1845 
June fi, 1S44 

Julv 7, 1S42 
Aug. 11,1845 



Feb. 



,1846 



Dec. 6, 1845 
Jan. 5,1846 
June 29,1841 
June 28,18.50 

....do 

....do 

....do 

Nov. 23, 1841 
Apr. 13,1848 
Sept. 9,1*46 
Oct. 14,1846 

....do 

Dec. 21,1837 
Sept. 8,1846 
Sept. 9,1846 
Dec. 2s, 1846 
Dec. 4,1845 
June 29,1841 
Sept. 9,1846 
Dec. 21,18.37 
Oct. 14,1846 
Mar. 30,1846 
Sept. 8,1846 
Sept. 4,1846 
Jan. 2, 1851 

Mar. 30,1846 
Sept. 4, 1846 
Mar. 30,1846 
Dec. 6, 1845 

14,1846 
9, 1840 
3, 1846 

11,1845 
July 17,1845 
Dec. 24,1845 
....do 



Oct. 
May 
Sept. 
Dec. 



Remarks. 



Forhim.self and for hiscliildren. 



And to Ko-na-la-hona Sa-ho-yo, and Ta-na-cub- 
bee, her children over 10 years of age: and E-la- 
pa-ho-ka, her child under 10 years of age at date 

of treat V. 



In his own right and to his 2 children under 10 
years of age at date of treaty. 

For himself and 3 children under 10 years of age 

at date of treaty. 
.\nd her child over 10 years of age at date of 

treaty. 



And to her 2 children (1 over 10 years and 1 under 
10 years of age at date of treaty). 



6 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians to whom patents were issued for land under the pro- 
visio7is of art. U of the treaty of Sept. 27, 1830 (7 Stat. L., SS3-335) — Continued. 



Patentee. 



Date of 
patent. 



Remarks. 



Ilie-ho-nah , 

Im-ah-ho-yo , 

Im-ma-no-a-ho-ka . . . 

Im-un-no-ubbe 

I-o-pon-na 

Isaac 

Isha (or Ayaha) 

Ish-man-tiibbe 

Ish-mi-ah 

Ish-no-ak-ke 

Ish-ta-bo-le 

Ish-te-la-mah 

Ish-te-o-nah 

Ish-ti-hok-ta 

Ish-tim-e-le-chubbe . 
Ish-tini-lah-homah . . 

Isli-to-niah 

Ish-to-nah 

Ispia 

Is-te-ubbe 

Is-to-noka 

Jacob 

James, Adam 

Jemmy 

Jenkins, Jack 

John 

Joel 

Johnson, George 



Johnson, Mary. 



Jonas 

Jones, John 

Jones, Tennessee 

Kan-che 

Kanoon-tubbe 

Kan-o-to-nah 

Ko-na-la-ho-na 

Koo-cha 

Labrouse, Mathew 

Lah-bah-tubbe 

Lah-tubbe 

Lap-pa-te-mah 

Lajjissa 

Lightfoot, WilUam 

Lila 

Low- ah-ho-ka 

Lii-ock-ho-mah 

Lush-ho-min-tubbe 

Machaia 

Mah-la 

Martha 

Matona 

McGilbry (aUas McGilverry), John. 
McGilbry (aUas McGilverry), John. 



McGilbry (otherwise called McGilvery), 

Lucy. 
McCiilbry (otherwise called McGilvery), 

Turner. 

McGilvery, Gordon 

Me-ha-shan-tah 

Me-ah-she-ciibbe 

Me-he-tim-ah 

Me-she-mah 

Me-hah , 

Mima , 

Min-ta-ham-bee , 

Mol-a-tubbe 

Mol-la 

Muncrief, Sampson 

Mrirphy, George , 

Na-con-sha 

Nah-ho-to-nah 

Nail, Benjamin , 

Nail, Greenwood L 

Nail, Marceline 

Nelson 

No-ah-ho-nah 

No-a-timah , 



Sept. 
Jan. 5 
Mar. 30 
Jan. 5 
Dec. 11 
Feb. 3 
Dec. 14 
Mar. 30 

do.. 

Jan. 30 
Oct. 14 
Aug. 18 
Mar. 30 
Jan. 5 
Mar. 30 

do.. 

Jan. 13 
Mar. 30 
Jan. 2 
Jan. 5 
Dec. 28 
Mar. 30 
Sept. 30 
Dec. 14 
Oct. 10 
Oct. 14 
Sept. 9 
Aug. 11 

do.. 



Apr. 

Aug. 

Jan. 

Sept. 

Dec. 

Sept. 

Dec. 

Dec. 

Jan. 

Jan. 

Mar. 

Jan. 

Sept. 

Mar. 

Apr. 

Mar. 

Apr. 

Oct. 

Sept. 

Apr. 

Apr. 

Sept. 

June 

Apr. 



Mar. 20; 
Apr. 8 
18 



1851 
1846 
1845 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1848 



Nov 
Jan. 
Dec. 
Aug. 
Sept. 4 
Oct. 14 
Apr. 13 

do.. 

Sept. 4 
Dec. 
Oct. i 
Jan. S 
Dec. 
Mar. i 
Sept. 

do 

do 

Sept. 9,1846 
Oct. 14,1846 
Nov. 3,1837 



1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1845 
1847 
1846 
1846 



1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 



1846 
1S46 
1841 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1844 
1846 
1842 
1846 
1846 
1845 



1848 
1842 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1845 
1839 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1846 
1843 
1848 
1846 
1848 
1846 
1846 
1848 
1848 
1846 
1839 
1845 

1845 

1845 



For himself and 7 of his children, and to S. D. 

Johnson, 1 of his children. 
For herself and 2 children under 10 years of age 

at date of treaty. 



1846 
1845 
1838 
1840 
1845 
1846 
1846 



As he had 4 children over 10 years of age at date of 

treaty, instead of 3 children. 
And to Susie, her child. 

And to his 2 children under 10 years of age at date 
of treaty. 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 7 

List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians to whom patents were issued for land under the pro- 
visions of art. U of the treaty vf Sept. 27, 18-30 (7 Stat. L., .3S.3-3.35)—C ontinxied. 



Patentee. 



Date of 
patent. 



Remarks. 



Nok-e-ne-ham-be. 
Nok-o-an-tubbe.. 

No-que-ah 

No-wah-ho-na 



Oak-la-yubbe 

Ogalainia 

Ogleasta 

Ohoya (or Ohoyo Tom) 

O-ka-in-cheek-mah 

Ok-is-tam-bee 

Ok-la-ho-ya 

Ok-lah-kah-ho-yo 

Oklanowah 

0-na-ham-be 

Ona-hain-in-taiah 

Oon-ah-tubbe 

Oun-tah-che-ah 

Oxberry, James 

Pah-lubbe 

Panecbba 

Paress, Antony or Anthony. 

Pa-sa-chubbe 

Pa-shah-ho-nah 

Pebworth, Henry 

Pe-his-tubbe 

Pe-tah-ah-mah 

Pie-yah 

Pinson, Betsey 

Pis-ah-ha-mah 

Pish-tah-o-nah 

Riley, Patrick 

Robertson, Lewis 

Sahoyo 

Sa-lan-ma 

Sampson 

Shota 

Sho-tubbe 

Sila.s 

Shallahohoka 

Sock-a-to-nah 

Sotke-tubbe 

Sow-ah-tubbe 

Stabohla (alias Stapolelona). 
otanton, Allan 



Aug. 18,1846 
Dec. 11,1845 
Apr. 13,1848 
July 17,1845 



Dec. 11,1845 
Sept. 8,1846 
Sept. 9,1846 
Jan. 20,1888 
Sept. 2,1846 
Mar. 30,1846 
Jan. 13, 1846 
7, 1846 



Sept. 
Sept. 
Jan. 
Sept. 
Dec. 



9,1846 
2, 1841 
8, 1846 
5. 1845 



Dec. 24,1845 
Mar. 24.1841 
Dec. 14 1S46 
Sept. 3, 1846 
Oct. 11,1843 
Sept. 2,1846 
Dee. 11,1845 
May 14,1842 
Jan. 20,1846 
Aug. 18,1846 
Sept. 7,1846 
July 2, 1842 
Sept. 2,1846 
Jan. 13, 1846 
Oct. 11,1843 
Sept. 28,1842 
Dec. 28„1846 
Mar. 10,1843 
Dec. 28,1846 
Sept. 3,1846 
Sept. 4,1846 
Sept. 8,1846 
Dec. 28,1846 
Jan. 20,1846 
Jan. 13, 1846 
Dee. 24,1845 
Dec. 28,1846 
do 



Su-Sa 

SylUn 

Ta-ho-ba 

Tah-ho-pe-ah 

Tah-lah-mo-tubbe 

Tah-te-nah 

Tah-pa-nis-sto-nah-ho-nah . 



Aug. 
Sept. 
Sept. 
Dec. 
Sept. 
Jan. 



18, 1846 
8,1846 
7, 1846 

4. 1845 

8. 1846 
20, 1846 



TaUawahomibbee . 

Tanacubbee 

Tilly 

Te-hr-cubbee 



To-bla-chubbce 

Toby (alias Tobba), James. 

Tom, Jim 

Tom, Jack 



Nov. 23,1846 



Feb. 3, 1847 
Dec. 28,1846 
Sept. 9,1846 
Aug. 12,1845 



Dec. 1, 1845 

rlo 

Feb. 26,1841 
Apr. 4, 1849 



Tomahoka 

To-ne 

Took-Iah-tubbe 

Turnbull, William. 
Tu.s-k;v-ah-tubbe . . . 

Tuskiaha 

Tussaka 

Tu-wah-kee 

Tu-wa-tu-cha 



Sept. 
Mar. 
Oct. 
Oct. 
Oct. 
Dec. 
Dec. 
Oct. 
Mar. 



9,1846 
30, 1846 
14, 1846 
11,1843 
14, 1846 
14, 1846 
28,1846 
14, 1846 
10, 1843 



For herself and for 3 children over 10 years ol age 
and 2 children under 10 years of age at date of 
treaty. 



And tojhis 2 childred under 10 years of age at date 
of treaty. 



Id his own right and to Cun-nah-ho-yo-E-lah-no- 
la, and Ona-tubbcc, his children over 10 years 
of age, and to 0-quah-ha-nah and Cun-nah-la- 
tubbee, his childred under 10 years of age at 
date of the treaty. 



And to Hota-tubbee, his child over 10 years of 
age, and lota-tubbee and E-mo-konah, his 
children under 10 years of age at date of treaty. 



And to Sinai Tom, Sophia Tom, I/Cvicy Tom, 
and Hamah Tom his 4 children under 10 years 
of ago at date of the treaty. 



Patent surrendered and new patent issued July 
14, 1848. 



S INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians to whom patents were issued for land under the pro- 
visions of art. 14 of the treaty of Sept. 27, 1830 (7 Stat. L., 333-SS5)— Continued. 



Patentee. 



Date of 
patent. 



Remarks. 



Tu-wa^tu-cha 

I?b-:iheni-ah 

I'n-ah-lian-tubbe . . . 

I'li-ah-tubbe 

I"n-ta-hi-o-che 

rn-tim-ah-ho-nah. . 

Walker, John 

AVard, Tobias 

Wa-tubbe 

Wes-hock-she-homa 

Wesley 

Ya-ha-mali 

Yem-e-tubbe 

Yem-ma-hubbe 

Yem-o-ho-nah 



July 

Dec. 

Sept. 

Jan. 

Dec. 

Sept. 

June 

Sept. 

Dec. 

Sept. 

Feb. 

Sept. 

Dec. 

Sept. 

Sept. 



14, 1848 
5,1845 
2, 1846 

13, 1846 
4, 1S45 
7, 1846 

29, 1841 
3, 1846 

24, 1845 

3. 1846 

3. 1847 
2,1846 

24, 1845 
2, 1846 
7, 1846 



j^ The Chairman, What is the date of that roll ? These rolls are all 
available in the Indian Office here in Washington. 

Mr. Ferris. It w^as the Douglas-Cooper muster rolls. That show^s 
them, and there were War Department records transferred to the 
Indian Office and can be had in the Indian Office. 

The Chairman. What year w^as it made in ? 

Mr. Ferris. Between 1830 and 1855, along during that period. 
The dates they received patent is opposite their respective names in 
each case. 

Later came an act of Congress which provided that for those who 
W'Ould not take land — and there was some maltreatment of Indians, 
by some Government agent, as suggested by Mr. Harrison- — land was 
not worth much at that time and only 143 families would take it. 
Congress came along and made a supplemental provision for these 
and said they may have scrip, which is a certificate w^hich allows them 
to take land anywdiere in three or four States that they deshe. 

I hold in my hand a list of Indians that received scrip, 3,885 of them 
m number, and there are the Indian names. Here are the dates on 
wiiicli they received it. This is also from the Indian Office. I wiU 
pass this aroimd so that you can see it. I will also incorporate it 
m the record so it can be referred to later. It is as follows: 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 {5 Slat. L., 518), in lieu of land to which they 
were entitled under article 14 of the treaty of Sept. 27, 1830 (7 Stat. L., 333-335). 



Anolata. 

Aletisteia. 

Anonitama. 

Ashahoma. 

Aloncsa. 

Anontamla (or Anotaioubbeej. 

Anontona. 

Anointubbee. 

Anatambee. 

Ataiahona. 

Alamautubbee. 

Alaboma. 

Anaintubbee. 

Alanantiibbee. 

Ahotema. 

Akomotubbce. 



Anocwaatonah. 

Atanahajo. 

Apatubbeo. 

Athpota. 

Antamba. 

Aleisteia. 

Alahotcma. 

Anokfhoto. 

Apolo-apah. 

Ashatema. 

Akoytellatubbee. 

Alchma. 

Atakohubbee. 

Altona. 

Anahoyo. 

Atabotema. 



INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL, 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip loas issued unaer the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Ashahema. 

Alanintubbee. 

Apala-hoka. 

Anciibbee (or Ooncubbee). 

Alatahoma. 

Athtolahoka. 

Anontee-na. 

Allah-ho-te-mah. 

Ah-fah-mo-ah. 

Ah-te-ubbee. 

Ah-pock-ah-mah-tubbee. 

Ah-tah-chubbee . 

Ah-te-uh-la-ho-ka . 

A-o-nah-ha-mah . 

A-low-a-ho-nah. 

Ah-pock-ar-mah . 

Ah-chali-fah-tubbee. 

An-no-sa-tubbee (or Pessahtubbee). 

A-bon-wa-te-mah . 

Ah-ta-hah. 

A-he-ah-tubbee. 

Ah-ne-la-ho-yo. 

Ah-took-ko. 

Ah-po-to-tubbee. 

Ah-no-yo-ka. 

Ah-chah-fah-le-mah. 

Ah-ho-te-mah. 

Ah-lah-ka-tubbee. 

Ah-fah-mo-ah. 

Ah-no-ah-ka. 

Ah-la-mah-ho-nah. 

Ah-na-sa. 

Ah-no-le-che-mah. 

Ah-pok-ah-nan-tubbee. 

Ah-pa-sah. 

Ah-no-lah. 

Ah-lock-ka-cha. 

Ah-to-nubbee. 

Ah-la-chubbee. 

Ah-to-shoubbee. 

Ah-min-tubbee. 

Ah-pah-lah-ho-nah . 

Ah-l(i-co-tiibbee. 

Ah-took-la. 

Ah-pah-tubbee. 

Ath-tubbee. 

Ah-mesa-cubbee . 

Ah-pah-sah-te-mah. 

Ah-mo-(^la-tiibbee. 

Ah-chi-ah-tubbee. 

Ah-be-hah-tah. 

Ah-sha-la-tubbee. 

Ah-h(i-la-to-nah. 

Ah-fliah- pa-tubby. 

Ah-na-chubbee. 

Ah-no-fa-nubbee. 

Abl)a-ho-nah. 

Ah-nocik-tah-lubbee. 

Ah-modu-pish-ah-cha (or He-tuck-loo-ah). 

Ah-to-la. 

Ah-no-ka. 

Ah-to-nau-ka. 

Ah-took-ah-lah. 

Ah-to-no-ham-bee . 



Ah-hath-la. 

Ah-pe-sah-tubbee . 

Ah-lo-min-chubbee. 

Ah-mak-ham-ubbee . 

Ah-no-ah-ha-cubbee . 

Ah-no-skoo-nah. 

Ah-ho-tu-nah. 

Ah-noho-tim-ah. 

An-tim-ah. 

Ah-na-hoak-ho-nah . 

Ah-chuck-ma. 

Al-me-ho-ye. 

Ah-ho-nah. 

Ah-na-tim-ah. 

Al-moon-tubbee. 

Al-e-he-mah. 

Ah-la-che. 

An-un-tim-ah. 

As-she-ap-ki-ka. 

Ah-kah-ne-ubbe. 

Ah-no-Ie-chubbe. 

An-thle-no-nah. 

Ah-be-ho-ka. 

Ah-chafl'a-ho-nah . 

Ah-che-lah. 

Ah-be-ne-tubbe. 

Ah-moon-to-uah. 

Ah-took-co-la (alias Andrew Wier, i. e., 

Ware ) . 
Ah-take-ah-ho-nah. 
Ah-ish-tim-ah. 
Ah-bah-ka-tubbee. 
Ah-be-ho nah. 
An-o-ok-iuah. 
Abit-ish-tiah. 
Ah-to-ko-tubbe. 
Al-be-ish-to-nah. 
Ah-che-to-nah. 
Ah-look-Iin-tubbee. 
A-mah. 

Ah-no-Ie-ho-na. 
Ah-cho-ah-ho-ka. 
Ah-sha-ho-ka. 
Ah-bah pil-a-ba-ka. 
Ah-kas-te-ma-tubbee. 
Ah-noo-se-ho-nah . 
Ah-to-chubbe. 
A h-fa b-moon-tubbee. 
Ah-te-ko-fubbe. 
Ah-nubbe. 
Ah-took-ah-li-ah. 
Ah-he-o-ke. 
Ah-tah-ho-nah, 
Ah-lo-ine. 
Amah. 

Ah-po-Ia-tubbe. 
Ah-be-tah-tah. 
Ath-la-ho-yubbe. 
Ah-fhe-tui)be. 
Ah-toki'-ah-to-nah. 
Ah-chc-ah-tubbo. 
Ah-(he-l)ah. 
Ah-mok-le-tuljbe, 
Ah-he-kah-ho-nah. 



10 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaiv Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Ah-yo-mah-te-kah. 

Ah-lo-mah-tubbe. 

Ah-hooklin-tubbe. 

Ah-shal-in-tubbe. 

Ah-niuk-fil-le. 

Ah-lo-ko-tubbee. 

Ah-took-la-ho-ka. 

Ah-fa-ko-mc-ho-nah. 

An-it-im-ah. 

Al-mo-tubbe. 

Ah-ho-la-tim-ah. 

Ah-thliip-pik-chi-ah. 

Al-be-hah-tiibbe. 

Al-be-ho-chi-ah. 

Ah-ki-sah. 

Ali-ho-nah. 

Ah-chuck-mah-he-ah. 

Ah-ko-moon-tubbee. 

Ah-look-la-tubbe. 

Ah-ka-ko-tubbe. 

Ah-lo-te-shubbe. 

Ah-la-chun-ah. 

An-ha-tun-ah. 

Ah tho-me-ho-nah. 

Ah-e-nah. 

Ah-kah-pul-e-tubbe. 

Ah-to-bo-tubbee. 

Ah-be-ho-nah. 

Ah-pa sah-ho-ka. 

Ah-pa-Ia-ho-nah. 

Ah-tah-ho-nah. 

Ah-che-ah. 

Al-inoon-to-nah. 

Ah-fah-inoon-tubbe. 

Ah-sho-me-kah. 

Ah-ash-tubbe. 

Ah-no-ah-ham-bee. 

Ash-ha-cain-bee. 

Ah-ha-to-nah. 

Ah-no-sa. 

Ah-be-ne-tubbe. 

Al-be-ho-nah. 

Ah-to-la-te-mah. 

Ah-tah-le-ho-nah. 

Ah-chiah. 

Ah-chah-ah-tubbee. 

Ah-wah-te-ah. 

An-tubbe. 

Ah-Io-sho-nio-tiibbe. 

Ah-ho-te-nah. 

Al-be-te-ah. 

Ah-tah-le-ah. 

Ah-noo-tom-be. 

Ah-nook-wah-ah-too-nah. 

Ah-tah-be-le-ho-nah . 

Ah-to-catch-a. 

Ah-unk-fa-la. 

Ah-no-ah-ta-cubbe. 

Ah-e-o-ka-tim-ah. 

Ah-pe-le-tubbo. 

A h-che-ah-ho-nah . 

Ah-to-no-ho-nah. 

Ah-pa-la-ho-nah. 

Ah- no-ah- tam-be . 

Abbe-to-ble-tubbe. 



An-iik-fil-le-te-mah. 

Ab-it-is-te-ah. 

Ah-she-chin-ah. 

Ah-le-ho-ka. 

Ah-tubbe. 

Ah-ne-ho-te-mah. 

Ah-pis-sal-la. 

Ah-ho-yo. 

Ah-mi-yah. 

Ah-cha-pa-ho-uah. 

Ah-she-lah. 

A h-pa-sa- tan-he . 

Ah-la-che. 

Ah-wa-che-ho-nah . 

Ah-puk-yo-hubbe . 

Ab-be-ish-ti-yah. 

Atuk-lam-be. 

Ah-pah-lah-ho-nah. 

Ab-ti-ti-yah. 

Ah-fah-mah. 

Ah-fa-ko-ma-to-nah. 

Ah-chuk-ma-tubbe. 

Ah-took-la-ho-mah . 

Ah-no-la-ho-nah. 

Ah-koo-chun-tubbe. 

Ah-che-le-tah. 

Ah-( ho-mah-kah, 

Ah-lo-mah. 

Ab-be-ho-nah. 

Ah-lah-nah-tubbe. 

Ah-no-ah-tubbe. 

Ah-took-lah-tubee. 

Ah-nook-we-ah-che. 

Ah-ka-che-ho-nah. 

Ah-nook-lah. 

Ah-lo-mah-tubbe. 

Ah-to-la. 

Ah-cha-fo-tubbe. 

Ah-che-lah. 

Ah-pa-sa-ho-nah. 

Ah-nook-fille. 

Ah-ne-po-tubbe. 

Ab-it-ik-ah-ne-wah. 

Ah-pa-sau-tubbe. 

Ah-fa-ko-me. 

Ah-fha-le-tah. 

Ah-che-ah. 

Ah-pe-lah. 

Ah-t ha-fo-ho-nah. 

Ah-nook-fille-hoka. 

Ah-ne-hoon-tubbe. 

Ah-che-to-nah. 

Ah-hak-po-tubbe. 

Ash-tubbe. 

Ahe-min-tubbe. 

Ah-fa-no-tubbe. 

Ah-cha-po-tubbe. 

Ah-nook-we-ah. 

Ah-no-sa-tubbe. 

Ah-po-to-he. 

An-cha-to-nah. 

Ah-no-la-tubbe. 

Ah-pa-sa-ho-nah. 

Ah-no-si. 

An-tubbe. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



11 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip wa,s issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Abbe-took-chi-ah. 

Ah-che-ah-so-nah . 

Ah-took-li-ah. 

Al-a-te-mah. 

Ah-nook-fil-la. 

Ah-nook-hum-ah . 

Ah-lo-mah-ho-nah . 

Ah-chuk-mo-ho-yo. 

Ah-fhe-ah. 

An-tah-ho-nah. 

Ah-look-le-tubbe. 

Ath-ta-lam-la. 

An-ta-te-mah. 

Ah-noon-tubbe. 

Ah-took-lan-tubbe. 

Abbe-neen-tubbe. 

Al-noon-tubbe. 

Ah-cha-kahi-hioo-nah . 

An-chok-to-nubbe . 

Ah-the-ho-nah. 

Ah-pa-sah-ho-ka. 

Ah-no-si. 

Ah-fa-ma-ho-ka. 

Ah-nook-cha-mah-ho-nah. 

Al-be-chef-fah. 

Ah-che-ubbe. 

Ab-no-la-ham-bee. 

Ah-wa-che-ho-nah. 

Ah-wah-che (alias Ah-wah-che-ho-nah) . 

Ah-nook-che-to. 

Ath-ko-la. 

Ab-tah-she-nali (alias Hash-tah-sho-nah). 

Ali-po-tubbe. 

Ah-hom-lah. 

Al-moon-tubbe (or Oon-an-cha-tubbe). 

Ah-man-to-nah. 

Ah-pok-a-mah. 

Ah-took-ah-lan-tubbe. 

Ash-ka-ma. 

Ah-be-ti-ah-ho-ka. 

Ah-yo-ah-h(j-nah. 

Abbe (or Ah-nah-be). 

An-an-to-ma. 

Ah-ne-he-nah. 

Ah-chah-lc-ho-nah. 

Ah-fum-ah-took-a-lo. 

Ah-to-ga-te-mah. 

Ah-ne-he-mah. 

Ah-nook-we-ubbe. 

Ah-])a-lah-to-nah. 

Ah -toog-la-he-nah . 

Ah-le-ho-tonah. 

Ah-to-ble-cha. 

Ash-chin-tubbe. 

Ash-te-ah-ho-nah . 

Ah-chi-ah. 

Ah-chin-tubbe. 

Ah-chiuk-mah-tubbe. 

Abbe-ho-yo. 

Ash-ho-nah. 

Ah-wan-tubbe. 

Ah-po-to-le. 

Ah-took-ah-lan-tubbe. 

Ah-la-mah-ho-mah. 



Ah-man-tubbe. 

Al-o-ma-cha. 

Ah-pe-hah-tubbe. 

Ah-chuck-mish-tubbe . 

Ah-no-ha. 

Ah-to-be-tubbe. 

Ah-no-Ia-che-mah. 

Ah-took-ah-lah. 

Ah-chuck-mah-to-tubbe . 

Ah-to-kah . 

Ah-take-ah-te-mah. 

Ah-to-bah-tubbe. 

Ah-pis-ta-ka-tubbe . 

An-tah-ha-mah. 

Ami-yah (or Emi-yah). 

Ah-wa-tu-nah . 

Ah-to-lah-tubbe. 

Ah-che-to-nah. 

Ah-chick-mah-ho-nah . 

Ah-lo-wa-tubbe. 

Ah-hum-me. 

Al-be-tiyah. 

Ah-po-la-chubbe . 

Ash-wak-tubbe. 

Ah-ho-nah. 

Ah-ca-no-tubbe. 

Ah-che-toma. 

Ah-che-le-tubbe . 

Ah-cho-ah. 

Ah-no-wah-tubbe. 

Ah-moon-ti-yah . 

Ah-chuck-mah-to-ka-tubbe. 

Ah-onk-tim-ah. 

Ah-oon-tam-be. 

Ah-tuk-la-me-ho-nah. 

Ah-ha-tam-be. 

Ah-ta-hubbe. 

Ah-ho-yo-tubbe . 

Ah-ho-gla-cha. 

Al-is. 

Ah-cha-fon-tubbe. 

Ah-pa-san-tubbe . 

Ah-be-chunk-tah . 

Ah-chu-nan-tubbe. 

Ah-pa-sam-la (or Pa-sam-lee) . 

Ah-ho-nah. 

Ah-fah-nah. 

Ah-fun-nee. 

Ah-pul-e-chubbe. 

Ah-ho-ka. 

Ah-kah-me-zubbe . 

Ah-cah-lah-honubbe . 

Ah-pa-nam-tim. 

Ah-chuf-fah-tako-ubbe. 

Ah-chunk-ma-ho-ka. 

Ah-po-la (or Big Billy). 

Ah-nook-chin-to. 

Ah-pa-sa-ka. 

Ah-the-o-hubbe. 

Ah-ka-ua-la-tubbe . 

An-la-ho-ua. 

Allice. 

Ah-to-ko-ah. 

Alth-to-ca-ho-nah, 



12 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in tvhose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Ah-chiik-a-la. 

Ah-can-uon-tubbe . 

Ah-le-noon-tub be . 

Ah-mo-te-ab. 

Ah-pab-ta-tubbe. 

Ab-be-ho-ka. 

Ab-pa-kah-tubbe . 

Al-ca-in-la. 

A-num-brilla. 

Ak-an-ubbe. 

A-che-ho-ka. 

Aiigustin . 

Ala-ti-ya (alias Ho-le-te-a). 

A-bo-ha-ya. 

Ah-nook-fa-lah. 

Ah-to-sho-tubbe . 

Ah-pa-hah (alias Johny Walk). 

Ah-pis-ab-te-mah . 

Ah-nab-bo-te-nah . 

Ah-min-tubbe. 

Ah-no-sa-cubbe (or No-sa-cubbe). 

Ab-cba-can-tubbe . 

Ab-lab-bo-ka. 

Ab-pa-lab -bo-nab . 

Ab-lab-ta-mab. 

Ab-pa-san-tubbe. 

Ab-took-ab-Iah-him-ah . 

Au-a-in-ta. 

At-ta-tam-ca. 

An-ti-kubbe. 

A-to-ni-ciibbee. 

A-cba-i-a-tubbe. 

An-ti-cub-kubbee. 

Ah-be-bat-tab. 

Ah-fo-kab-tubbe. 

Ab-ue-te-mah. 

An-ok-cbe-to. 

Ab-a-wa-la. 

A-po-la-tubbee. 

Acbi-a. 

Al-a-Ia-ko-la. 

Asb-o-mo-ta. 

A-batb-la. 

An-na. 

A-ya-to-na. 

Ab-o-la-ta. 

Ah-la-ba-ma. 

Al-a-te-ma. 

Ano-la-bo-na (alias Yin-ma-ne-la) . 

A-cba-la. 

Ab-be-coo-cbali. 

An-thle-bubbe. 

Ans-coon-la-tubbe. 

Ali-tuk-la-me-bo-nab. 

Ab-cho-man-tubbe. 

Asb-tubbe. 

An-tu-nab. 

Ausb-tubbe. 

Ab-bi-o-tubbe. 

Ab-cbuck-a-la-mah. 

A-hu-ta. 

Amos. 

An-un-tubbe. 

Ab-fa-koma. 



Al-it-o-nah. 

Bun-na-lio-na. 

Bo-lebo-na (alias To-lo-le-lio-na). 

Binia. 

Butab. 

Bling-a-tubbe. 

Ba-maba. 

Beck-y. 

Bi-a-ta. 

Bil-la. 

Bab-fo-cubbe. 

Bab-pis-sah. 

Be-lin-go-nah. 

Beckey^ 

Bun-na-cbubbe. 

Bab-sa. 

Be-lin-kat-tab. 

Be-nab. 

Be-nan-cha-bo-ka. 

Bab-fun-ka. 

Ben. 

Bun-ab-tu-nab. 

Bum-ab-tab-ka (or Tik-be-ubbe;. 

Becka. 



Buch-ab-bono. 

Be-nan-cbe. 

Bab-la-bo-nah. 

Bah-bo-te-nab. 

Bab-te-nah. 

Bab-ah-nubbe. 

Bo-la. 

Bab-na-tubbe. 

Ba-bo-nab. 

Ba-ba-ka. 

Bab-ka-tubbe. 

Be-nin-tubbe. 

Bab-nubbe. 

Bell David. 

Basey. 

Becky. 

Bu-mab. 

Bat-sey. 

B e-lin-go-nab-gobn . 

Bab-nab-tubbee. 

Bab-tubbee. 

Bab-na-cbe. 

Be-na-tam-le. 

Bob-tubbe. 

Bob-cba-lab. 

Bi-o-glab. 

Bo-ba-le. 

Bah-na-tubbee. 

Bob Captain (alias Mingo-bo-nahj. 

Belink-at-tab. 

Can-a-bo-yo. 

Cboinpab. 

Cbe-mo-na. 

Cbickasa. 

Ciin-uea-ho-ua. 

Cuu-nea-tubbee. 

Cbarles. 

Con-sba-tubbee. 

Cbis-be-bo-ma (alias Capt. Red Post Oak). 



INDIAN" APPROPRIATION BILL^ WVJ. 



13 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Conam-o-mubba. 

Chonk-choo. 

Can-on-e-ta-la. 

Cun-ne-a-tubbee. 

Chom-pa. 

Ohok-ma-he-ma . 

Can-che-te-ma. 

Cunnam-an-tubbee. 

Can-cha-to-na. 

Cliil-le-tam-la. 

Oan-cha-ho-ka. 

Chonnis. 

Ohutfa-to-na. 

Can-pa-lubbee. 

Che-hom-bee. 

Co-cha-tubbee. 

Oun-na-cha. 

Cim-ne-chubbe. 

Cah-to-nah. 

Che-no-lah. 

Charles. 

Chuffa-ta-no-la. 

Co-lick. 

Cun-ne-chubbe. 

Cah-la-tubbee. 

Cun-ne-ubbee. 

Cun-ne-ah-tubbee. 

Cah-la-tubbee. 

Cun-ne-o-nah. 

(.'un-ne-ah. 

Chut'fa-tubbee. 

('un-ah-he-mah. 

Carson . 

Cah-to-nah . 

Com-pal-tubbee. 

Con-nobn-tam-lee . 

Chamis. 

Cun-ne-isli-to-nah. 

Charles. 

('ah-la-ho-na. 

(Jun-ne-clie-nah. 

Ciin-a-la-to-nah. 

( 'un-ne-mo-nubbee. 

(.'e-lia. 

Cun-ne-ubbee. 

Cun-na-see. 

Cun-ne-ho-chubbee. 

(Jo-chubbee. 

Cun-noon-ta-raah-ho-nah . 

Cun-noon-tah-cubbee. 

f!un-noOn-tah-cubbee. 

Creesay. 

C un-ne-tara-b ee . 

( 'on-che-te-mah . 

('hah-ley. 

Cun-no-ma-tubbee. 

Cus-cahtick-lah (or Yock-a-na-lio-mah). 

Chille-tali. 

Cun-na-mam-leo. 

Chin-sah. 

Cun-noon-tah-chubbee.' 

Chum-tah. 

Cun-ah-ha-raah. 

Cun-e-mam-la. 



Cun-e-mah-tifm-ah. 

Cun-un-tah-lee. 

Can-un-tah-mah . 

Cun-e-ubbe. 

Cun-e-mam-lee. 

Cun-e-me-yubbe. 

('o-ah-ho-mah. 

Cun-e-mah. 

Chaffa-to-nubbe . 

Gun-e-o-te-kah . 

Che-kah. 

Cun-e-mah -ho-nah. 

Chin-alle. 

Chille. 

Captain Bob (or Mingoloma). 

Che-ma-ho-ka. 

Co-tah. 

Chal-le. 

Ghak<-al-e-che. 

Cun-e-te-mah . 

Con-cheto-nah. 

Che-po-lah. 

Chah-hubbe. 

Cun-e-ish-tii-nah . 

Cun-e-o-te-mah. 

Can-e-tam-le. 

Chul-le. 

Coon-oon-tan-te-mah . 

Cun-noon-to-mah-la-ho-k a . 

Chah-ah-tubbe. 

Con-ah-la-chubbe. 

Che-ho-'nah . 

Chum-pah-te-mah . 

Cun-nc-mah-chubbe. 

Che-ho-te-mah. 

Cun-ubbe. 

Chuf-ah-tam-be. 

Con-che-ho-ka. 

Cun-e-mah-tim-ah . 

Cun-ah-min-chubbe . 

Chane. 

Cun-e-mo-nubbe. 

Chan-le. 

Cun-e-me-tim-ah . 

Cun-u-ta-cubbe. 

('on-slie-ho-yo. 

(]he;f-fa-to-nah. 

Charl^. 

Chit-o-kubbe. 

(Jhif-fa-ti-yah. 

Chuf-fa-lio-ka. 

Chook-mam-le. 

('ha-le-ho-nah. 

Chaf-ubbe. 

Cheffa-to-nah. 

Che-co-tubbo. 

Cha-wah-te-ah . 

Chick-a-mah. 

Chof-fa-to-no-wah. 

Cha-laii-lah. 

( "hick-a-sah-ho-ka. 

('h(>f-f()-li-yah. 

('lK)-h()-ka (or Ah-chu-wah). 

( 'he-mah . 



14 



INDIAN APPROPBIATION BILL, 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 2S, i54^— Continued. 



Chuk-fy-noo-sa. 

Chil-le-tani-be. 

Chiif-fa-tu-nubbe. 

Chef-fa-tu-nubbe. 

Chef-fa-ho-ka. 

Chick-oon-tubbeo. 

Chif-1'o-ti-ya. 

Chuf-fa-tubbee. 

Chef-fah-bin-Iubbe. 

Ciin-ne-tain-be. 

Che-lok-kee. 

(jhick-e-mah-yo-ho. 

Chiim-j)ah-te-mah. 

Can-o-ine-tubbe. 

Cun-e-ah-he-mah. 

Cun-e-ah-hok-tah . 

Cun-e-moon-tubbe. 

Cun-oon-te-mah-homah . 

Cum-un-mubbee. 

Cun-e-ah-ston-ah. 

Cousin. 

Con-ah-Ia-cha. 

Con-sha-lah. 

Cun-ouu-tam-be. 

Cuii-e-mah-tubbee. 

Con-e-moon-tubbee. 

Con-sha-ho-ka. 

Cuu-e-mo-nubbee. 

Choom-pah. 

Chum-pah-ho-ka. 

Chah-e-te-mah. 

Cun-ne-ah-ho-nah. 

Con-che-ton-nah. 

Chum-pah-te-mah . 

Cun-e-o-to-uah. 

Cun-ne-te-nah. 

Che-cah-ta. 

Cha-po-la. 

Chick-a-sha. 

Che-nii-o-ka. 

Cut-tah-ho-chubbee. 

Che-ah. 

Chiei'-fah-tam-Iee. 

Cun-ne-tubbe. 

Cun-ne-o-to-nah. 

('hubbce. 

Chah-la. 

Com-pa-lubbee. 

Cun-ne-tain-bee. 

Cut-a-po-la. 

( 'hik-mah-em-ah-tubbee. 

Cun-e-me-to-nah. 

Cole-Coleman. 

('Olbert. 

(^ham-a-ha-jo. 

Che-po-ka. 

Cah-te-inah. 

Cha-fahn-to-nah. 

Can-cha-ho-nah (or Tan-cha-ho-nah). 

Cuffah-ka. ' 

Cun-no-mah. 

Co-chubboo. 

Cun-oon-ta-raah. 

Cun-oon-ta-bee. 



Che-ni-la-ho-ka. 

Con-o-he-mah. 

Cou-sha-ho-nah. 

Cun-oon-ta-kah. 

Chuf-fa-tubbee. 

Che-ho-a-to-na. 

('ha-cha. 

Cha-co-nubbee. 

Co-cha-tam-co. 

Carson (or Ka-chi-en). 

Chuf-fa-ta-no-la. 

Cham-pa-ya (or Sham-pi-a). 

Chooni-pa-ho-ka. 

Chuffa-tubbee. 

Cobb Pickens. 

Cobb, Any. 

Cobb, Molly. 

Chu ffa-to-ke-ubbe. 

Chook-ah-tal-le. 

Cush-o-nah. 

Chil-le-ta. 

Cun-oon-tick-cah. 

Cunc-me-tim-ah . 

Chok-tah-ho-ma (or Pis-it-ti-yah). 

Chas-po-ho-nah. 

Che-mah-le-ho-ka. 

Cut-te-o-to-mah. 

Cun-ne-me-ubbe. 

Caleb, John. 

Con-she-ho-ka. 

Cole, Colbert. 

Cole, John. 

Cole, Augustin. 

Dyer, Lucinda. 

Dyer, Nelly. 

Dyer, Jeremiah. 

David. 

Dixon. 

Davis. 

Dennis. 

Durant, Pierre. 

Durant, George. 

Durant, Vina. 

Durant, Sylvester. 

Diu'ant, Jefferson. 

Durant, Isham. 

Durant, Sophia. 

Durant, Charles. 

Dyer, Polly. 

E-o-ta. 

E-mait-cha-tubbee. 

Esteeupunna-kbka. 

E-la-ho-yo-ta-ma . 

E-raach-o-nubba. 

Em-a-la. 

E-mam-ba. 

E-la-to-nubbee. 

E-li-che-to. 

Ea-to-na. 

Een-puk-a-D ubbee . 

Eli-lubbee. 

Ea-ish-ya. 

E-muth-pa-sa-lubbee. 

E-me-she-ho-na. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



15 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in ichose behalf scrip ivas issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1S4'J — C-ontinued. 



E-lo-tu-ne. 

Ema-ho-na. 

E-yo-ko-tubbee. 

E-Iaah a ho-na. 

Eli-an-ne-ho-nah. 

E-a-chiil)-bee. 

E-a-han-tubbee. 

E-man-o-a-tubbee. 

Ea-ho-na. 

E-la-is-te-ma. 

E-la-cha. 

E-ma-ho-na. 

E-lah-ho-te-mah. 

E-lah-so-qiiah. 

E-yok-a-ma-tubbee . 

E-mock-mahn-tubbee. 

Eho-ah-to-nah. 

Eah-la-ho-nahr 

E-ho-yo. 

E-ah-ho-ke-ta. 

Emah-ho-kah. 

E-lah-moon-tubbee. 

E-a-mock-in-tubbee. 

E-mo-mah-ho-ka. 

E-ah-ho-nah. 

Eah-ho-imbbee. 

E-man-te-ah-ho-ka. 

E-ah-chiibbee. 

E-lam-bee. 

E-ah-tul)bee. 

E-o-tul)bee. 

E-lah-nubbee. 

E-lo\v-e-te-mah. 

E-yo.^h-moon-tubbee. 

E-o-nah. 

E-coffe-tubbe. 

E-ah-ha-ciibbe. 

E-o-kah-tubbe. 

E-o-kah-tiibbe. 

E-mak-ko-nubbe. 

E-lah-ho-to-nah. 

E-lu-uah-tubbe. 

E-me-la-chubbe. 

E-mish-toc-nah. 

E-lah-e-shiibbe. 

E-lo-nah. 

E-o-tim-ah. 

E-la-yo-kak-tubbe. 

E-mi-ah-tubbe. 

E-math-la-cubbe. 

E-la-pe-ah. 

Ela-pe-sa-ho-ka. 

E-le-ah-ho-nah. 

E-lah-pi in -ah-ho-yo . 

E-la-pam-lc. 

E-m ah-yah-ste-mah . 

E-lah-took-am-be . 

E-la-po-iuibbe. 

E-la-ho-tiibbe. 

Em-ma-lo-ho-ka. 

E-la-ho-ta-ka. 

E-lo-ho-yo. 

E-ok-tam-bee. 

E-mlth-lubbee. 



E-mish-ah-ho-nah. 

E-ah-ho-chubbe . 

E-iu-nubbe. 

Eah-kiah-ho-ka. 

E-ha-ho-nah. 

E-lap-o-tim-ah. 

E-male-le. 

E-lah-ho-tim-ah. 

E-lah-u-kah. 

E-ca-we-che. 

E-lah-pish-te-ah . 

E-lah-ho-ka. 

E-lah-in-im-ah. 

E-ah-ho-ka-tubbe . 

E-yak-o-tubbe. 

E-iah-tam-be. 

Eah-to-chubbe. 

E-ah-ho-kah-tubbe . 

E-lah-ne-ho-nah . 

E-glen-iibbe. 

E-lu-nah-tiibbe. 

E-le-no-ali-chubbe. 

E-ah-tah-ah-ho-mah. 

E-le-mah-ho-mah (or La-mah-ho-nah). 

E-mo-nubbe. 

E-lah-ii-kah. 

E-cah-le-ho-nah. 

E-li-o-te-ka. 

E-klen-ah-tah (or E-glen-ah-tubbe). 

E-ah-ho-ka. 

E-ki-o-nubbe. 

E-lah-ha-cubbe (or Il-ah-he-kah). 

E-ah-io-nah. 

E-li-o-te-mah. 

E-lap-no-wah. 

E-ah-ho-uubbee. 

E-ah-ho-tim-ah. 

E-]i-yubbe. 

E-yal-a-ho-ka. 

E-la-pa-subbe. 

E-la-lo-ma-tubbe. 

E-lah-ho-nah. 

E-niah-to-kah. 

E-le-ah-tubbe. 

E-la-cha-te-mah. 

E-ah-he-tubbe. 

E-ha-la-to-nah. 

E-Ia-ho-(o-mah. 

E-me-la-to-nah. 

E-mock-he-lubbe. 

]i;-lah-he-kah (alias E-la-ha-cubbe). 

E-ah-lubbe. 

E-ho-ah-to-nah. 

E-la-pe-wah-ho-nah. 

E-ma-che-ah-ho-nah. 

Eah-eah-tiin-ah. 

E-lah-1'e-tu-nah. 

P>ah-to-nah. 

E-ah-an-lul)be. 

E-lah-tah-Uibbe. 

E-as-t.u-ubbe. 

Eli-pipa. 

E-oh-lah. 

E-ah-ha-lubbe. 



16 



INDIAN APPROPBIATION BILL, 1911. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, i5-^;>— Continued. 



E-lah-pah-nubbe . 

r]-ah-lo-ho-tim-ah. 

E-Cah-tah. 

E-lap-in-tubbe. 

Ivyah-ah-to-nah. 

I>la shubbe (or Billy X-kon-Sliawj. 

E-ya-ka-tubbe. 

E-miyh-te-ubba. 

E-mo-nubbe. 

E-ne-cun-e-ubbe. 

E-yah-hubbe. 

l']-cha-pah-no-enah. 

I>lah-ho-yubb. ' 

E-mack-liibbe. 

E-li-che-tubbe. 

E-mah-tall-ah. 

E-inah-sha. 

E-li-chuf-caibbe. 

E-ma-ha. 

E-cba-po-tubbe. 

E-lo-ok-ehi-ah. 

Emo-nubbe (alias Im-mo-nubbe). 

E-lan-tubbe. 

E-mah-no-wah. 

E-mah-ho-to-nah. 

E-sba-ho-ka. 

E-lah-tah-to-nah. 

E-ho-ah-tiibbe. 

E-lah-be-nubbe. 

Edmund. 

E-yak-tubbe. 

E-yah-he-tubbe. 

E-mish-tubbe. 

Elah-pah-ne. 

E-lah-pis-ubbe. 

E-le-o-nah. 

E-lab-pe-kah. 

E-yab-ish-to-nah. 

E-chah-pah. 

E-Io-ma-him-mah. 

E-ab-hani-be. 

E-lah-liibbe. 

E-lah-ho-yubbe. 

E-mah-a-lubbe. 

E-vak-a-che. 

E-ii-bo-kubbe. 

Ivsta-bo-yo. 

E-lah-lo-ma-tubbe. 

E-cba-po-tubbo. 

E-lan-to-nah. 

E-as-ta-ho-nab. 

E-bak-ah-tubbe. 

E-yah-tu-nah. 

E-mi-ya-tubbe. 

E-mo-na-ho-ka. 

Ey-ali-li-yah. 

E-lak-cbe-te-mah. 

E-li-yubbee. 

E-bah-took-lah. 

E-lah-o-tiibbe. 

E-ah-bo-nubbe. 

E-yan-to-bo-ka. 

E-lab-po-cbubbe. 

E-min-to-ho-nah. 

E-lah-he-mah. 



E-la-ho-te-ah. 

E-ah-ho-nubbe. 

E-lah-pish-ti-yah. 

Este-mil-le. 

E-yak-a-tubbe. 

E-yi-ho-yo. 

E-yah-hah-tubbe. 

E-mal-ho-mab (alias E-mah-Ie-ho-mah). 

E-mah-tain-bee. 

E-lah-ko-tubbe. 

E-lab-ke-mah. 

E-lah-te-ubbe. 

E-lah-ho-yo. 

E-li-to-nii'bbe. 

E-ya-le. 

E-ah-tom-bee. 

E-li-chin-tubbe. 

E-li-be-nubbe. 

E-la-ba-cubbee. 

E-lap-no-an-tubbe. 

E-lah-che-ho-nah. 

E-yah-ham-bee. 

E-ah-ho-ka-te-mah . 

EUce. 

E-sha-to-nah. 

E-hu-e-te-tubbe. 

E-ah-cah-to-nah (or Cah-to-nah). 

E-mis-tubbe. 

E-ab-ho-te-niah. 

E-man-che. 

E-me-to-ho-nah. 

E-mo-no-la-cho-nah . 

E-ho-ah-tam-be. 

E-le-o-ka-te-mah. 

E-lah-yo-kah-to-nah . 

E-ah -ham-bee. 

E-lo-mah. 

E-lah-pi.sh-ah. 

E-cah-no-ah-ho-nah . 

E-ah-ho-ka. 

E-lah-to-nah. 

E-mam-bo. 

E-mah. 

E-lo-nah. 

E-yah-hain-ba. 

E-hi-o-cubbee. 

E-man-cha. 

E-mah-nin-che. 

E-yak-ki-ah. 

E-yah-hain-ba. 

E-hain-bee. 

E-ma-cha-lubbe. 

Eli-cha-tubbe. 

E-lah-pa-ah. 

E-Hza. 

E-mab. 

E-li-tubbe. 

E-lah-e-mah. 

E-lo-yah-tubbe. 

E-lik-hon-ah. 

E-lah-pio-ubbe. 

Em-bo-tah. 

E-ah-te-mab. 

E-o-kah-tubbe. 

E-cha-po-tubbe. 



INDIAN APPKOPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



17 



Lint of Missinsippi Choctaw Indians in wJiose behalf scrip uas issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 'JiS, 1842 — Continiied. 



Elian-ne-ho-uah. 

Ex-ah-kah-ho-tubbe. 

E-lani-bee. 

E-mah-lah-te. 

E-no-\vah. 

E-hiin-mah-la-t ubbe . 

E-ah-sha-tubbee. 

E-lah-ho-yo-ho-nah . 

E-ah-lo-ho-nah. 

E-lo-inon-to-cubbee. 

E-me-le. 

E-li-za. 

Eah-che-hiibbe. 

E-lah-tiin-ah. 

E-o-cutch-ah. 

E-chah-pah. 

E-mah-shah-chubbe. 

E-ah-ham-bee. 

E-lah-pe-ah-ho-nah . 

E-mah-om-be. 

E-to-pok-a-nah. 

E-meen-tah-ho-nah. 

E-li-oon-ah. 

E-lah-tubbe. 

E-lap-ik-e-bah. 

E-yon-tah. 

E-mipah. 

E-mo-thah-tubbe. 

E-ii-o-te-mah. 

E-lan-tiibbe (or Tish-o-pi-a). 

E-a-chubbe. 

E-la-ha-lu-ta. 

E-lo-ni-ah. 

E-Io-ho-ka. 

E-liza. 

E-mo-na tubbe. 

p]-o-fa-tubbe-to-uah (or To-cubbe). 

E-whah-to-nah. 

E-ah-kah-tubbe. 

E-lah-imi-tubbe. 

E-hi-ha-cubbe. 

E-la-te-mah. 

E-iiiah-lubbe. 

E-ah-tahn-tubbe. 

E-ah-ki-ah-to-nah. 

E-ah-ho-nubbe. 

E-li-o-nubbee. 

Katamia Charles. 

E-inil-la. 

E-la-hn-teina. 

E-laii-tul)be. 

E-la-(a-i-li<)-na. 

Ea-ish-tubl)0. 

E-math-lo-la. 

Ecn-ta-ho-ka. 

E-ma-lubbee. 

E-iio-ka. 

E-li-/,a. 

E-lo-\va-tubbe. 

Eliza. 

E-la-took-e-la. 

E-lo-ma-fhubbe. 

E-la-pa-nubbo. 

25134— PT 4—16 2 



Elijah. 

Ellen. 

E-o-lah. 

E-lah-pam-la. 

E-lah-we-tubbe . 

E-ye-me- tubbe. 

E-ioom-ah-ho-kah. 

E-li-emah. 

E-lah-pa-lubbe. 

E-no-wah. 

E-me-le-hubbe. 

E-la-u-ka-tubbe. 

E-lah-pun-te-mah. 

E-me-la-ho-na. 

Fay a. 

F'annubbe. 

Falle-cheto. 

Fal-a-min-chubbee . 

Fe-ma-la. 

Fa-nubbee. 

Fe-tick-ah-chubbe. 

Fil-e-ah- tubbe. 

Fo-kah-lin-tiibbe. 

Fe-temah-ti-mah . 

Fe-le-kah. 

Fal-ah- moon- tubbe . 

Fe-le-nubbe. 

Fe-le-tah. 

Fe-laka-tubbe. 

Fil-e-ah-tim-ah. 

Fo-ko-lin-tubbe. 

Fah-hah-mah-ho-nah . 

Full-o-mo-tubbe. 

Fil-e-mam-le. 

Fal-lal-moon-tubbe. 

Ful-le-ho-mah. 

Fun-ne-ho-mah . 

Fa-la-moon-tubbe. 

Fil-e-ti-yah. 

P'e-lah-moon-tubbe. 

Fil-e-tubbe. 

Fo-look-a-che. 

Fish-o-ho-cubbe . 

Fo-le-na-te-mah. 

Fa-lam-c- tubbe. 

Fish-u. 

Fil-o-cutch-e. 

Fa-lam-a-tubbe. 

Fal-am-a-tubbo. 

Fal-am-ah-ho-ka. 

Fil-e-tah-ho-nah. 

Fal-ali-mo-tubbc. 

I<^lle-moon-tubbe. 

Fallo-ah-ham-be . 

Fil-e-mah. 

Fil-e-to-nah. 

Fc-le-moon-tubbe. 

Fe-lern-e-tubbe. 

Fin-niin-tubbe. 

Fille-tah. 

Fut-cha. 

Fil-le-ca-tubbe. 

i"'ill('-nian-tubbe. 



18 



INDIAX APPROPEIATION BILL, 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw ImUans in whose behalf scrip ivas issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1 842~V ontinucd. 



Fall lah-mah. 

]'\in-c-uhl)e. 

F()-lub-l)e-chubbe. 

Fo-l()()k-a-clie. 

Fitrh-ik-iio-wah. 

Fish-ali-he-lubbe. 

Fah-lam-beo. 

Fillu))bee. 

Fil-e-mon-o-ti-ma, 

Fil-e-mah-tubbe, 

Fa-lo-mah. 

Fee-cliubbe. 

Foster, Thomas W. 

Foster, (icorge H. 

Foster, Elija G. 

Frazer, Sweeny. 

Fo-ca-tubbee. 

George. 

Gibson. 

Go-ma-chubbee. 

Gibson. 

Gowin, Betsey. 

Hol-la-chee. 

Him-mo-ka-to-na. 

Hoya (or Ahoya). 

Hothma. 

Ha-ma-yo-lubbee . 

Hoth-ta-ma. 

Hok-a-tiibbe. 

Ha orho. 

BiUubbee. 

Hoy-e-ta-na. 

Hoyo-ho-tubbee. 

High i-ho-na. 

Hoi hi chubbee. 

Fem-a-fhe-na. 

Ho-pa ka-che. 

Hus-he-Mingo, 

Ho-ka-lo-che. 

Ho-te-ma-ta. 

Ho-(i-a-ka. 

I lo-te-mo-na-ho-ka. 

llul-tuk-ho-ma. 

llollah. 

Ili-a-ca-to-na. 

llan-nul)bec. 

Hia-cutch-ee (or Hi-yo-ca-chee). 

Ho-ta-cubbee. 

Ho-but-a-ka. 

Hi-a-lubbee. 

Ilo-te-o-a. 

ilo-lel -tah-ho-nah. 

Ho-to-nah-chubbee. 

Hi-ack-co-nubbee. 

Hick-a-tom-bee. 

Hi-a-la. 

Hal -la. 

lio-che-fo. 

Ilo-te-mah. 

Hop-pa-la-tubbee. 

He-ne-ah-ho-nah. 

Ho-to-man-cha. 

Ho-ta. 

Ho-tah-ho-nah. 

Ho-tam-bee. 



Ho-lah-tubbee. 

Han-nah. 

Ho-ha-cubbee. 

Hith-ah. 

Ho-nibbee. 

Him-mock-ah-bee. 

Hi-ah-la-ho-mah. 

Ho-te-man-chubbee. 

Ha-chah. 

Ho-pa-na. 

Ho-gla. 

Ho-cho-na. 

Hick-a-to-mah. 

Ho-tan-te-ni-ah. 

Hi-o-tah. 

Ha-la. 

Ho-te-nubbee. 

Ho-to-nah. 

Ha-cubbee. 

Hi-o-te-mah. 

Hun-o-nah-tubbee. 

Ho-pi-ah. 

Ho-te-ah. 

Ho-bah-cha-ho-nah . 

Ho-te-ah-ho-nah. 

Ho-yo-pa-tiibbe. 

He-kah-tubbee. 

Ha-cha. 

Ho-chubbe. 

Plo-nah. 

Ho-ta-che-ho-nah. 

Ho-lima. 

Hah-tak-lam-ah. 

Hock-la-ho-nah. 

Hun-niibbe. 

Ho-tim-ah. 

Ho-tah-at-tiibbe. 

He-kah-tubbe. 

Ha-le-tubbe. 

Hi-oiin-ubbe. 

Ho-lah-bah-ho-nah. 

He-kuh-ti-mah. 

Ho-tan-yah. 

Ilo-tish-tam-be. 

Ho-tish-im-ah. 

Ha-ka-a-ho-mah . 

Hal-le. 

He-kak-ti-niah. 

Hok-la-ho-nah. 

Ila-o-lc-tini-ah. 

Ho-lini-e-ah. 

Hah-tak-ubbe. 

Ha-tick-illa. 

Ho-tik-la. 

Ho-tah-(ah. 

Hi-ne-ubbe. 

He-cubbe. 

Ho-te-ah. 

He-u-ah-le-tubbe. 

Ho-to-nah. 

Ho-ne-Iam-be. 

Hol-l)a-tubbe. 

Ho-ne-mah. 

He-nah-ho-mah. 

Hook-e-la. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



19 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Hi-ah-ka-tubbe. 

Hath-la. 

Hi-o-tubbe. 

He-vo-ho-nah. 

Hool-lo. 

Ho-ka. 

Ho-cha. 

Ho-te-mi-ah. 

Hon-oon-tam-ba. 

Hi-ah-ka-tubbe. 

Hi-e-le-ho-nah. 

Ha-lubbe. 

Ho-tira-ah-che. 

Ha-la-che. 

Ho-te-an-ah. 

Hota-tim-ah. 

Ho-lis-ah-tubbe. 

Ho-yo-ubbe. 

He-challe. 

Ho-pak-o-nah. 

Ho-te-ah. 

Hik-it-e-ah-ho-nah. 

Ho-tin-lubbe. 

Ho-yo. 

Hon-ah-ho-tubbee. 

Hah-be-nah. 

Ho-yo-nubbe. 

Ho-bah-tam-tubbe. 

Hok-e-lo-tubbe. 

Ha-took-lubbe. 

Ho-te-tubbe. 

Hush-e-ho-mah. 

Ili-yo-hx. 

Ilol-le. 

Ili-een-ah-tubbe. 

llo-le-ti-ah. 

Ilolla-ti-yah. 

lIok-k)-tubbe. 

Ilo-bah-to-mah. 

Ho-tan-tu-nah. 

Hi-o-to-nah. 

Ho-tc-mah. 

Ilill-a-tubbe. 

Ilo-lis-so-ho-nah. 

IIo,s-to-no-che. 

Hio-yale. 

Ili-yah-kubbe. 

Ho-chuF)be. 

Han-tubbe. 

Hush-.shook-ho-mah, 

Ilo-te-inah. 

no-kah-tub])e. 

Ho-to-inah. 

ITus-ke-ah-hooc-ta. 

IIo()-1<'-inah. 

Ile-hibbe. 

Ilo-yubbe. 

Hah-la-le. 

Ho-to-nah. 

Hool-bah-tubbe. 

Hushe-te-mah. 

Hok-sa-gee. 

Hi-yok-ah. 

Hi-ape-ha-sa. 



Ho-pi-yah . 

Hoo-sah-tubbe. 

Hoo-che-mah. 

Heith-lah-tho-nah. 

Ho-tubbe. 

Ho-mok-o-nubbe. 

Ho-to-pah-le. 

Hoth-te-nubbe. 

Ho-be-ti-yah. 

Hin-che. 

Ho-te-kubbe. 

Hoth-te-nubbe. 

Ho-tubbe. 

Ho-pah-ka-ho-nah . 

Hush-hook-ho-nah. 

Hi-tuke-pa-ho-ma (or Yak-i-ah). 

Hush-e-no-wah. 

Hi-em-e-te-mah. 

Hi-o-tubbe. 

Hi-a-lee. 

Ho-yubbe. 

Hash-ah-i-ta-nah . 

Hi-a-lee. 

He-ki-yuable. 

Ho-te-nah. 

Hi-en-e-chubbe. 

Hah-mook-la-ho-nah. 

Ho-chon-chubbe. 

Ho-pa-hin-tubbe. 

Ho-tish-le-ah. 

Ho-te-yah. 

Ho-te-mah. 

Ho-yo-ho-nah. 

Hoy-ubbe. 

Hi-ak-ah. 

He-yape-ah-ha-jo. 

Hi-yak-hubbo. 

Ho-che-fo-tubbe. 

Hol-la-ho-nah . 

Han-ah-to-nah. 

Hi-ah-co-nubbo. 

He-no-nah-tubbe. 

Hool-bah-tubbe. 

Ho-nah. 

Ha-ba-nah. 

Ho-nah. 

Ho-pah-ka-tubbe. 

Ho-lah-cha. 

Ho-lah. 

Ham -bee. 

Ho-ni-o-nubbee. 

Ho-te-mah. 

Ho-yn-an-tubbe. 

Han-ah-mock-ah-yah. 

Ho-tn-ak-ah. 

Ho-lah-ho-nah. 

Hon-to-nah. 

Ho-lah-te-mah. 

Hoo-nah. 

IIn-me-ho-tul)l)0. 

Ho-bah-(uni-bce. 

Hah-nubboe. 

Hi-ak-o-lubbee. 

Han-nubbe. 



20 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL^ 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Hool-bah-ho-nah . 

Hik-e-yah. 

Ho-nah . 

rii-ah-ka-tubbe. 

He-lubbe. 

Ha-man-che. 

Ho-knbbe. 

Hik-ah-che. 

Him-ah-\)bbe. 

He-ka-che-ho-nah . 

He-ah-ka-isb-to-nah. 

Ho-ka. 

Him-nuk-iibbe. 

Ho-ba-tubbe. 

Him-moc k-ara-bee. 

Ho-te-mab. 

Hi-a-to-iiah. 

Ho-yo-pab. 

Ho-ta-bo-iiab. 

Ho-tab-kih-ba-mah. 

Ho-le-ba-cbubbee. 

Ho-cbe-nah. 

Ha-ta-niab-bo-nab. 

Ho-ka. 

Ho-te-nab-ho-nah. 

Ho-pab-kah. 

Ho-pi-ab-tubbe. 

Ho-sMn-she-bo-mah. 

Ho-yo-pa. 

Ho-e-o-iia. 

He-a-ka-ti-iia. 

Hotcb-a-ka. 

Ilo-ba-te-i-a. 

Ha-tubbe. 

Hob-tab. 

Hi-ab-ko-mibbe. 

H L-ab -ka-mab-tubbe. 

Ho-le-to-pab. 

H( -ta-cubbe. 

Hick-a-tubbe. 

Ho-yo-ka. 

Ho-to-nab. 

Hetty. 

Ho-te-niab. 

Ho-jji-ab-bo-niab. 

Ho-no-que-ah. 

Huii-oon-pab. 

Ho-i)ab-cubbe. 

Ho-cbab. 

Hono-ki-o. 

Ha-cubbe. 

Hoth-te-ma-bo-yo. 

Hotb-te-ma-ho-yo. 

Ho-ma-a-cbee. 

Hik-in-tubbe. 

Hick-a-tubbe. 

Ha-yo-pa. 

Hali-son. 

Ha-to-na. 

Ho-ba-tish-ubbe. 

Ho-ti-kab. 

Hok-ta. 

Ho-ka-lo-tubbe. 



Husb-to-nubbee (alias Ae-ma-lo- 

cubbe, alias 0-gle-isb-ti-a). 
Ho-vo-bo-nubbee. 
Ho-iin. 
Ho-na-cbi-to. 
Ho-cba.. 
Ho-cba. 
Ho-te-ook-a. 
Ho-vo. 
Hol-la. 
Ho-e-ho-nah. 
He-ke-ah-bo-nah. 
He-kab. 
Ho-ba-te-yab. 
Ho-to-uab. 
Ho-chubbe. 
Ha-mook-lab-tubbe. 
He-to-nab. 
Ho-te-ini-ah. 
Ho-yvibbee. 
Ho-tam-bee. 
He-in-tira-ab. 
Hoo-too-nah. 
Hoo-la-te-i-a. 
H ock-lo-batt-ah . 
Ho-ba-lab. 
Ho-yo-ki-ab. 
Hock-a-la-tubbee. 
Hash-ta-sbo-nab. 
Is-te-a-ka-ia-bo-na. 
Ts-tam-ba. 
Is-tilla-bala-tubbee. 
la-ma. 

Ts-ti-e-a-tubbe. 
Ish-kumma. 
Is-tam-ba-la-bee. 
Ista-pe-ca-nubbee. 
Isb-te-mei-a-mibbee. 
Is-tam-cba. 
Is-tim-a-la-bo-na. 
Is-o-,s2;la-te-ina (alias Oclatema-Im- 

mil-o-bo-na). 
Is-tam-tubbee. 
Isb-tam-yab. 
I-ubbee. 
Is-tam-to-na. 
Is-ta-bo-la. 
Iste-man-cba-ho-na. 
I-o-\va-cbe. 
Ick-a-na. 
Im-ubbee. 
I-a-tubbee. 
Im-mish-to-nah. 
I-a-mab. 
I-suin. 

Isb-a-tvibbee. 
I-sim. 

Ish-te-mabn-a-chubbee. 
Im-mab-la-bubbee. 
Im-mi-e-ho-to-nah. 
I-ab-nin-tubbee. 
Ish-wa-chubbee. 
I-to-tubbee. 



INDIAN APPEOPBIATION BILL, 1911. 



21 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



sh-to-niah-ho-nah . 
m-sey. 

m-moch-fo-quah-tubbee. 
^sh-ton-te-mah. 
ck-neth-lo. 
a-hubbee. 
sh-tim-a-so-yo. 
m-mah-tha-chubbe. 
s-un-mah. 

-o-glah-tubbe (or Hustuk). 
-a-mah. 
lla-ho-nah. 
sh-ta-ka. 
Ooos-ta. 
sh-ta-ho-nah. 
sh -sham-bee. 
-orth-la. 
lla-ho-ka. 
lla-glah-to-nah. 
a-mah. 

sh-te-lah-mah. 
sh-wah-ki-yo. 
sh-te-mah-ka. 
con-nah. 

m-mah-no-wah-ho-nah. 
'm-mock-kah-ho-nali. 
o-piin-na-chubbee. 
m-mish-ti-yah. 
-o-ke-a-to-nah. 
sh-tah-shubbee. 
sh-tah-hxh. 
m-me-ho-ba-tubbee. 
^sh-to-mahlone-chubbee. 
^sta-min-cha-tubbee (or Mincha). 
m-mah-lah-te-mah. 
lla-con-a-tubbee. 
-ok-lo-tiibbe. 
-e-ne-tim-ah. 
n-pak-nah-ho-nah . 
m-ah-illa. 

ye-le-he-mah (or I-la-ho-nah) . 
saac. 
m-my. 

k-o-nah-te-mah . 
sh-te-ah-ho-nah. 
sh-te-lah-ne. 
sh-tah-ho-va-ho-nah. 
m-ah-lo-ho-nah. 
sh-lah-ho-ka. 
sh-ta-mah-ho-nah. 
t-a-pe-sah. 
sh-te-mi-ah. 
n-lah-tim-ah. 
m-al-to-va. 
m-e-lubbe. 
sh-te-mah. 
'sh-to-me. 
!s-tubbe-hattah. 
sh-tu-nah-tubbe. 
sh-ta-ah-ho-nah. 
sh-taho-nah. 
o-ka-to-nah. 
m-])iui-ah. 
s-shan-ke-ho-yo. 



Ish-ho-ni-ye. 

Ish-tubbe-ho-ka. 

Im-an-o-tik-a. 

Ish-tan-we-che. 

Im-ah-ho-nah. 

Ish-to-nah-che-ho-nah. 

In-Uih-tubbe. 

Im-om-ubbe. 

Ish-tah-hibbe. 

Im-ah-ho-yo. 

Illa-ho-yubbe. 

Insh-kam-ah. 

Ish-tal-ath-i-ah. 

Ish-tal-lah-ho-nah . 

Im-ah-ho-ka. 

Is-ho-ka (or Ath-le-ho-ka), 

I sh-tah-yo-co-nah . 

In-am-be. 

I-yo-nah. 

Isii-pah-lah-te. 

In-am-be. 

I-3'O-nah. 

Isii-pah-lah-te. 

Im-ah-tish-e-ho-nah. 

Ish-im-ah-ho-ka. 

Ish-te-mi-o-nah. 

In-lah-to-nah. 

Im-pun-ah. 

Ish-ti-ah. 

Ish-tam-mo. 

Ish-te-me-le-ho-ka. 

Ish-ti-ah. 

I-ath-le-pah. 

Im-ah-le-ho-nah. 

Ish-ta-lubbe. 

Ish-te-mi-ah-ho-ka. 

Is-te-che. 

In-lah-ho-nah. 

I-ah-che-ho-nah. 

Im-ah-tah-ho-nah. 

Ish-to-ni-ye. 

Ish-tem-bo-la. 

Im-uk-tah-nubbe. 

Ille-tubbe. 

Tm-ah-chi-ah. 

Ish-mi-ah-ho-nah . 

Is-sta-cha. 

Ish-tni-ok-eu-ah (or Ish-ton-ah-kue-ab, 

or Nok-we-ah). 
I-yok-e-tubbe. 
Ish-un-ah-ho-ka. 
Im-mah. 
I-e-ah-ho-nah. 
Tm-ho-ah-to-iiah. 
Tm-i-e-ah-ha-tiibbe. 
I.sh-t()-ka-ho-tim-ah. 
Ish-te-me-lu1)be. 
Ish-ho-yo. 
Im-ok-po-to-tubbe. 
l!sh-tul)be. 
Ik-io-ne-nah. 
Ish-ta-lo-la-tvibbe. 
Is-tubbe. 
Ish-no-wah. 



22 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 7,?^^— Continued. 



Isaac. 

In-lah-f'ubbee. 

Ish-ah-hok-ta. 

Im-ah-ho-yo. 

Ish-tah-ham-me. 

Ish-ta-uek-la. 

I-tun-la-tubbe. 

Is-te-me-chubbe. 

Im-ah-no-ah-tim-ah. 

Isli-tah-tubbee (or Big Jacob). 

Is-til-i-ah-ho-ka. 

Ish-ti-o-pa. 

I-yo-co-nubbe. 

Ish-te-ah-ho-ka. 

Im-al-tali-ho-nah. 

I-ok-la. 

Ish-tah-hook-tah . 

Ish-tah-tubbe. 

Ish-ti-ah. 

Il-ah-chaf-f ubbe . 

I-a-nah. 

Im-uth-ta-ha-to-nah. 

Ish-li-vah. 

I-o-ko-nubbe. 

I-map-kan-che. 

Itte-ho-mis-tubbe. 

Im-mo-nubbe. 

lUah-ish-te-mah. 

It-ta-mith-ubbe. 

Im-me-ho-nah. 

I-tu-nah. 

It-ah-ho-bo. 

Tsh-me-ah. 

Ib-ah-no-wa*h. 

In-chuk-mah-ho-yo. 

I-bak-ah-hubbe. 

I-lah-yo-kubbe. 

I-ha-kon-bee. 

Illah-no-la. 

Iha-gah-tubbe. 

Ish-te-ma-ho-nah. 

Tn-too-lah. 

T-ha-kah-tubbe. 

I-lap-im-hah. 

Im-ah-talle. 

I-ape-ah-tubbe. 

I-ik-len-ah. 

I-yo-ke-nubbe. 

I-hik-c-tubbee. 

I-mut-te-ali. 

I-ok-('he-ho-ka. 

Im-ah-yah. 

I -em-ma. 

In-tu-la-ho-ka. 

Ish-to-pah-nubbe. 

r-la])-o-nah. 

1,'^h tan-te-mah. 

Ish-ko-( hubbe. 

I-o-pa-cliee. 

Ish-la-ho-ka. 

Ish-ta-bo-ki. 

Im-o-na-ho-ka. 

I-it-tu-lah. 

Ish-te-mak-ah. 



Ik-tah-te-mah. 

Ish-te-mi-yah. 

Ish-te-ma. 

It-e-lak-na. 

Ik-be-tubbe. 

Il-ah-ish-to-nah. 

Ish-tik-ah-tubbe. 

In-sha-la-tubbe. 

lo-yah-hubbe. 

I -yah. 

Ish-tah-pak-mah. 

I-ask-ka-mah. 

Il-le-ho-ka. 

I-oath-ah. 

Il-ah-e-mah. 

Im-ish-too-nah. 

I-m-ah-tha-kah. 

Im-ah-i-sha. 

I-m-mil-le. 

Ik-lan-ah-tah. 

Im-ish-le-ah. 

I-a-che-ho-nah. 

Ish-ti-o-nah. 

I-hool-bah-tubbee. 

I-lah-ho-tubbe. 

I-hi-o-tubbe. 

I-lah-ha-be to-nah. 

I-bah-wa-che. 

Il-ah-ish-te-mah. 

I-een-la-hubbe. 

I-o-ga-be. 

I-o-kul)be. 

I-sham. 

Isk-te-kubbe. 

I-ha-ne-iibbe. 

It-e-ok-chak-ko. 

Ish-tah-ho-ho-tubbe. 

I-yo-mah-ho-ka. 

I-o-gle-te-mah. 

Ish-tah-ho-cubbe. 

Ish-te-mah-le-chubbe . 

I-yo-nah-te-mah . 

Ish-tah-ho-nah. 

I-lik-e-tubbe. 

I-al-ba. 

Ish-tan-tubbe. 

In-tah-hubbe. 

Im-ah-no-wabbe. 

Ish-tal-lah. 

In-lab-tubbe. 

Ish-tah-tubbe. 

Is-te-ini-o-nah. 

Ish-tesh-tan-be. 

I-yo-nan-te-nah 

Ish-tah-ho-nah. 

Ik-ham-ah. 

I-ath-le-pah. 

Ish-tan-to-nah. 

Ish-ta-ne-mah-tubbe. 

I-orth-Uih. 

I-yo-ko-mah. 

Ish-ta-hem-ah. 

I-e-ton-lah. 

Ish-te-mah-ho-nah. 



INDIAN APPROPKIATION BILL, 1917. 



23 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



I-niath-pis-a-tam-be. 

Ish-ho-ya. 

Ish-tah-a-mah. 

Ish-tah-he-niah. 

Ish-tah-ah-ho-mali. 

I-tiii-Iuh-him-ah. 

Is-chaf-ul)l)e. 

I-yo-lah. 

Ish-tah-ho-nah. 

Ish-tou-tin-ah. 

I-kah-po-lubbe. 

Im-me-ho-ka. 

I-an-ta-tublje. 

Ish-tah-ho-nah. 

Ish-ti-o-khi. 

Ik-lan-ul)be. 

Ish-to-ho-yo. 

I-o-liou-iil)be. 

Ish-ten-oah-to-nah . 

Ik-len-ah. 

Ish-to-nan-chi. 

Ish-pah-na. 

Ish-tini-uii-ho-ya. 

Lsh-a-ho-nah. 

Io-ka-chul)be. 

Il-la-con-nah-tiibbe. 

Ish-tin-nio-na-chu})be. 

I-co-mah. 

Im-ul)l)e. 

Im-moon-tubbee . 

Ik-ko-nah-ho-nah . 

11-la-ino-to-nah. 

Im-inah-ho-nah. 

Illa-ho-chubbce. 

Im-il-le. 

Iin-ah-ho-tonah. 

Is-tini-ah-ham-be. 

I-o-paii-ubbe. 

In-ah-hil)be. 

In-ish-tani-be. 

Ish-to-nie-hah-tul)be. 

I-it-ah-niiblic. 

Im-ah-to-nah. 

I-ok-lo-lmbbe. 

Iii-n()-1ul)l.e. 

lKh-ta-li()-hibl)e. 

l-wah-tii-iiah. 

I-ah-ka-ho-che. 

I-yo-ho-nah. 

Ii[i-ah-nc)-le-ham-l)e. 

It-e-mi-ya- (or Man-ya). 

I-yo-wa. 

Lsh-te-fhubbe. 

Il-l(>-n()-wa. 

Ish-iu)-\va. 

Im-iiia-no-lc-ho-yo. 

Is-8tul)lH'f'. 

Im-po-iuih. 

Im-iii()ii;la-rhiil)l)o (or 0-'j;lah-chul)l)e). 

Im-iiic-yah-ho-iiah. 

Ini-nio-nah-ho-ka- (alias Na-wa). 

Im-pi-ah. 

I-o-niah . 

1-o-gla. 



sh-tim-mah-la. 
-a-min-tah-ho-ka. 
sh-ta-ah-ha-cubbe. 
m-mah-sho-inah . 
1-b-che. 
sh-tah-ho-pah. 
sh-tah-hi])be. 
t-tah-lo\v-cchah. 
m-ino-iiah-to-nah . 
m-nio-ua-tul)be. 
sh-te-mah. 
sh-tahn-tah. 
m-mah-tiyah. 
sh-ti-a-mah. 
-anah. 
m-me-sha. 
sh-tah-ho-we-cha. 
sh-stanthly. 
s-te-me-i-a. 
m-mo-na-ho-yo. 
-cha. 

m-ma-to-ho-ho-na (or A-to-ba). 
m-mah-sah-che. 
s-ton-a-ka. 
o-glah. 

ck-glen-a-hee-rha. 
sh-te-maho-nah. 
1-ie-o-tubbe. 
m-al-to-bah. 
m-ah-lah-ho-nah. 
-o-koon-ah. 
k-1 e-ho-nah. 
m-mah-na-chubl)ee. 
m-mis-te-mah. 
-mah-pi-sah-timah. 
-mah-tah. 
-o-ka. 

-o-a-ho-ma. 

Uah-payn-to-nah (or To-nah). 
-ah-ho-to-nah. 
sh-te-mah. 
-la-tubbe. 
-o-ma. 
ackson. 

ack (alias Ona-lubbee). 
oshua. 
ones, Jenny, 
oel. 
ohn. 
ohn. 

ohn-im-mey. 
ackson. 
o8e])hus. 
ipie. 
ackson. 
ep. 

etferson. 
osey. 

um-pah (or Chum-pah), 
ohny. 
ake. 
inny. 
o-se. 
im. 



24 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctau^Indinns in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — C'ontinued. 



Joses. 

Johny. 

Joliii. 

Jc])e. 

Jim-Tom. 

John. 

Jinny. 

Jackson. 

Jones, Levi. 

James. 

Kan-slie-lio-to-ma . 

Kan-cha. 

Kunnea. 

Ke-yo-cu1)be. 

Kon-the-tubbe. 

Kan-oon-tubbe. 

I\on-che-ho-ka. 

Kan-oon-tubbo. 

Kan-clie-to-nul>be . 

Kon-che-tam-be. 

Kun-e-moon-tiibbe. 

Kom-pil-lali. 

Kon-e-toon-tubbe. 

Kon-fhe-ti-ah. 

Kan-che-ti-ah. 

Kan-oon-ta-tubbe . 

Kan-oon-ubbe. 

Kon-me-mah-ubbo . 

Kon-oon-tah-tubbe. 

Ko-tah. 

Ka-chubbe. 

Kis-ah-nah. 

Kon-che-tubbe. 

Kan-au-ren-tiu-tubbe . 

Kem~ish-to-nah . 

Kam-pa-lubbe. 

Koocli-abbe. 

Ko-mubbe. 

Kan rhe-le. 

Kun-ne-ahto-nah. 

Ka-ne-tim-be. 

Kun-nal-le-tubbe. 

Kan-cha-tubbe. 

Kan-cho-ma-ha. 

Kah-ne-tah. 

K()-nan-( hubbe. 

Ka-tha-ho-nah. 

Kan-che-tam-be. 

Kah-no-ma-ho-nah. 

Kis-tubbe. 

Kan-the. 

Kun-ne-ah-ho-nah. 

Koos-ta-na. 

Kut-tah-hah. 

Kah-il-le. 

Ka-tublie. 

Kah-non-te-ubbe. 

Kanche ho-ka. 

Kun-o-tah-ho-nah . 

Kah-po-tubbe. 

Ke-ille. 

Knn-ne-a-tnbbo. 

Kam-pe-tnbbe. 

Ka-to-nah. 



Kah-tam-ljco. 

Ka-yu-hubbe. 

Kush-oon-an-che-hnbbo . 

Kun -nc-ah-ho-nah . 

Ka-ha-le-ho-nah. 

Ko-bah-tom-bee. 

Kal-?o-tah. 

Kush-ah-nam-bee. 

Ke-lis-ta. 

Kah-lo-tubbe. 

Kik-e-te-raah. 

Ke-yo-ho-nah. 

Kan-ah-to-nah. 

Kiin-e-mah-ho-nah. 

Kiish-oon-a-miis-tnbbee. 

Ka-yo-ho-mah. 

Kal-po-tubbe. 

Koo-chubbe. 

Ka-o-ciibbe. 

Kxm-e-tom-be. 

Kam-pillah. 

Kam-pilla. 

Kon-kah-noos-ko-bo. 

Kush-oon-an-cha-ha-ba. 

Ko-noo-tubbe. 

Kim-e-ah-to-nah. 

Ke-ah-na-chubbe. 

Ko-tah. 

Kan-pho-mm-phe-hubbe (or Billy John). 

Knn-ne-ah-ho-nah. 

Ka-no-yo-he-kubbe. 

Koo-tah . 

Kan-cha-tom-la. 

Kan-che. 

Kuth-lee-lee. 

Kmi-e-an-che-ha-la. 

Kim-ah-ho-tubbe . 

Ko-na-ohiibbe. 

Ka-lo-ho-na. 

Ko-ke-i-a. 

Ka-o-tnbbo. 

Ko-chubbee. 

Kan-a-ho-te-ma. 

Kish-i:-mus-tnbbe (or Ka-lubbee). 

Kon-che-ho-nah . 

Ka-sa. 

Ke-ka. 

Kan-allo. 

Koo-cha-tiyah. 

Kan-che-ho-nah . 

Kah-no-me-he-mah . 

Kiiph-ah-hooc-ta. 

Kun-o-te-ma. 

Kurney, Charles. 

Kon-o-moon-tah. 

Ken-che-to-ah . 

Kearney, Oreesay. 

Kearn(>y, Wilson. 

Kearney, Josephus. 

La-pin-tnbbe. 

Lewis. 

Lorn a. 

Look-fan-cha. 

Laris. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



25 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Lo-sho-ma. 

Liishta. 

Lo-ka. 

Lo-mo-ka. 

La-pa-sa. 

Lo-mah-ka. 

Li-la. 

Litf-mah. 

Li-la. 

Lah-^a. 

La-man . 

Lah-pah-ho-nah . 

Lucy. 

Lo-ma. 

Low-ch-te-mah . 

La-t^ho-mah. 

La-mah . 

Li-za. 

Lah-sa. 

Lah-po-ka. 

Lo-mah-ta-ka. 

Lali-pah-te-mah . 

Lu?h-pam-le. 

Look-o-la-tubbe. 

La-po-te-mah. 

Le-ah-ho-nah. 

Lo-man-to-nah. 

Lucy. 

Lo-s*ho-mah. 

La-mah-ho-nah. 

Lo-ma-tubbe (alias E-la-lo-ma-tubbe). 

Lo-mah. 

Lah- wah-ho-n ah . 

Lo-ko-tam-be. 

Lo-sho-na. 

Low-ah-tubbe. 

Lah-ta-kah (or Tom Billy). 

Lo-ho-no-tubbe. 

Low-wa-txibbe. 

Loo-pa. 

Lah-ha-niibbe. 

Lo-niah-to-nah. 

Lap-ah-la. 

Lo-mah. 

La-pa-sa-ho-nah . 

Lah-habbe. 

Lash-pah. 

Lah-nah-che-ho-nah . 

La-sho-ma. 

Le-neah-ho-nah . 

Low-ah-che. 

Lah-mah-ha-cubbe. 

Lap-oon-ah-hah. 

Lo-mah . 

Low-a-chiibbe. 

Low-um-che. 

Lo-ma. 

Lah-pahn-la. 

Lo-mah-ho-shul-bee. 

La-fah-tah. 

Li-wca. 

Lewis. 

Lo-mah-tubbee. 

Le-ah-ho-ka. 

Lah-puh-ma-tu-mah. 



Lucy. 

Lo-wa-to-na. 

Lo-wa-ho-ka. 

Lo-ma-ho-na. 

La-ho-na. 

Lo-wa. 

Lub-bee. 

Lirea Ann. 

Lc-ma-ka. 

Lovie. 

Lo-mah. 

La-ti-ma-sha. 

Low-a-tam-na. 

La-sin. 

Li-la. 

La-i-e-ma-ho-na. 

La-pa-ta-ma. 

Lah-ma. 

La-pish-no- wah . 

Loo-ak-ish-tubbe. 

Lap-ah-hove-ta. 

Lah-pim-a-ho-ka . 

La-pa-chubbee. 

Lucy. 

Lo-wa- tubbe. 

Low-in-cha. 

La-po-nubbee. 

Ma-ha-to-na (or Wahatona). 

Molly. 

Min-ta-ho-to-na. 

Manc-che. 

Mon-in-tubbe. 

Min-te-mibbe. 

Mak-kee-ha-to-na . 

Ma-al-e-he-ma. 

Mut-ta-ho-na. 

Mul-tubbee. 

Mal-cho-na. 

Mon-to-na. 

Mal-a-ke-tiibbe. 

Mach-ca-ho-na. 

Man-sha-tubbee. 

Ma-hubbee. 

Ma-to-na (alias Ona-to-na). 

Me-hi-a-te-na. 

Ma-ho-la-tubbee. 

Me-ah-te-ubbe. 

M-le-ah. 

Mal-le-te-ah. 

Me-ah-tubbee. 

Mi-yah. 

Mo-min-tubbee. 

Mock-an-tubbee. 

Mason. 

Mina. 

Mon-tah . 

Me-mock-a-wah. 

Me-he-to-nubbee. 

Mah-la-ho-na. 

Me-ah-sho-nah. 

Mary Ann. 

M e-ah-sham-tubbee. 

Meah-sho-tubbee. 

Mock-ah-to-nah. 

Me-la-ho-nah. 



26 



INDIAN APPKOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in ivhose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, i,5?4^— Continued. 



Mo-me tim-ah. 

Me-ha-tiibbe. 

Mok-a-chubbee. 

Mah-no-te-naah. 

Me-ah-ish-tam-be. 

Mak-ah-le-ho-nah . 

Math-la. 

Ma-che-tubbe. 

Min-tah-hubbee. 

Mah-han-tubbe. 

Me-la. 

Mak-ah-hi-ah. 

Me-ah-sho-tubbe. 

Me-ash-e-mah. 

Mak-a-le-ho-ke. 

Mo-min-tubbe (alias Mo-ma-cha). 

Mah-to-nah. 

Mah-ke. 

Mah-ye (alias Ok-lih-mi-ah). 

Mah-he-cubbe. 

Me-he-yo-ka-lubbe. 

Me-ah-shu-nah. 

Min-te-hubbe. 

Moc-ah-be. 

Mal-le-tubbe. 

Me-he-le-ho-nah. 

Mah-ah-tah-ho-nah. 

Me-o-chubbe. 

Mi-ah-tubbee. 

Mak-ah-ho- tim-ah. 

Me-he-o-tim-ah. 

Mak-e-ubbee. 

Me-hah-tali-tah. 

Me-he-looth-tubbe. 

Mingo-homa. See Capt. Bob. 

Me-tah. 

Me-ash-f a n e-u bbe . 

Me-ah-che. 

Me-hah-tish-te-ah. 

Min-te-ho-yo. 

Me-ali-shiii-tubbe (or Me-ash-in-tubbe). 

Me-ah-ho-ka-tiibbe. 

Me-she-uiah-tubbe. 

Mah-le-le-ho-nah. 

Me-chubbe. 

Mi-ah-tim-ah. 

Me-yo-to-nah. 

Mo-iiah-tubbe. 

Mish-tah-tubbe. 

Miu-to-cubbe. 

Malle. 

Min-te-nubbe. 

Mah-ho-nah. 

Me-ah-i-ah-chu-nah . 

Min-to-ha-nah. 

Min-ta-chubbe. 

Me-ah-sho-nah. 

Mis-oii-an-ha-tubbe. 

Ma-hi-ye. 

Mah-ha-cubbe. 

Me-ah-chubbe. 

Mah-le-le. 

Mi-ah-tubbe. 

Me-hah-kah-tim-ah. 



Man-chubbe. 

Mo-sho-le-tubbe. 

Me-shu n-tah-tubbe. 

Mish-een-ah-to-nah. 

Mah-le-ah. 

Min-te-chubbe. 

Me-ah-she-mah. 

Me-hah-tim-ah. 

Me-la-he-yo-che (or Math-le-hi-o-ja). 

Me-ah-to-co-nah. 

Me-ha-ah-chubbe. 

Mo-niin-tubbe (or Billy Jackson). 

Mo-min-che. 

M-ha-che. 

Me-ha-te-kubbe. 

Me-cam-bee. 

Mo-sha-kal. 

Mue-la-le-chubbe. 

Mingo-hapia (alias Ne-ta-cubbe). 

Me-sham-bee. 

Mi-o-niibbe. 

Mi-yah-ho-nah. 

Mo-ehu-lak-a. 

Mah-to-nah. 

Mam-bah. 

Mo-min-che. 

Mul-la-le-ho-nah. 

Me-ash-pal-lah. 

Mah-li. 

Moon-tah. 

Me-ha-tubbe. 

M-she-he-kubbe. 

Me-ha-che. 

Mush-a-lah-kah. 

Ma-he-tubbe. 

Mul-a-tubbe. 

Mah-lah. 

Minte-ho-nah. 

Ma-ko-ka. 

Man-tubbe. 

Mo-uim-tubbe. 

Me-tah-lah. 

Mi-yah-tubbe. 

Mah-ka-tubbe. 

M ah- yah. 

Me-hat-e-she. 

Mah-ko-cha. 

Mah-ho-tubbe. 

Muk-am-bee. 

Mulla-tubbe. 

Mi-ya-cubbe. 

Me-ha-che- tubbe. 

Me-yah-tiibbe. 

Ma-ha-te-tubbe. 

Maho-ka. 

Me-ho-te-ah. 

Me-she-mah-ho-nah. 

Muk-ln-tiibbe. 

Me-ha-to-nam-bee. 

Me-haw. 

Me-shom-to-yah. 

Me-ha-che-to-nah. 

Muttul-bee. 

Me-ah-sho-ka. 



INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL, 1917. 



27 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in xvhosc behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Mah-la-ho-ka. 

Me-sham-le. 

Me-ha-took-ho-nah. 

Mah-le. 

Mab-e-ti-yah. 

Mal-as-ho-iiah. 

Ma-sho-la. 

Ma-chnbhe. 

Me-he-mah. 

Ma-ah-she-mah. 

Me-sha-tubbe. 

Me-sha-tubbe. 

Me-shone-tah-tubbe . 

Me-ho-te-mah. 

Moon-tubbe. 

Me-han-to-tubbe. 

Me-ah-sho-nah. 

Me-ah-sho-tiibbee. 

Me-he-o-tubbee. 

Mok-in-lubbee. 

Me-mah-tam-be. 

Me-ah-to-chubbee . 

Me-sham-be. 

Me-hah-to-nah. 

Me-ah-she-nah. 

Mah-la. 

Mus-shu-le-lah. 

Me-ah-tubbee. 

Min-te-lubbee. 

Math-la-tubbe. 

Me-shune-tubbee. 

Mi-hah-tim-ah. 

Mo-nim-tom-ba. 

Me-ash-onn-te-mah . 

Me-ha-la-ho-nah. 

Me-ha-to-nah. 

Mish-oon-tubbe. 

Mah-la-hn-nah. 

Me-ash-in-tubbe. 

Mok-o-nu])be. 

Mok-a-tubbe. 

Me-she-mah-tubbe. 

Me-hah. 

Me-shoi)n-tah-ta,h. 

Mah-le-ho-ka. 

Me-he-ah-te-mah. 

Me-ah-shu-nah. 

Me-ah-ho-nah. 

Me-hi-o-tubbee. 

Min-ta-hubbee. 

Moon-ta. 

Moon-tah. 

Me-la. 

Ma-ha-lo-ma-tubbee. 

Min-ta-ho-ka. 

Ma-hon-to-nah. 

Ma-ha-cha. 

Ma-ho-nah. 

M-ah-sho-nocka. 

Mo()n-tub>)ee. 

Me-o-tubbce. 

Mah-le-ah-tah. 

Min-tc-hubbee. 

Ma-an-too-nah, 



Mal-la-le-ho-nah . 

Ma-lo-la-ho-nah. 

Ma-lubbee. 

Mi8-to-bo-yea. 

Mook-ka-fa. 

Mi-yah. 

Min-tah-chubbe . 

Min-te-ho-yo. 

Me-he-tam-be. 

Ma-ha-to-na. 

j\Iin-ta-hiibbe. 

Me-ah-8hia. 

Me-ha-to-na. 

Mish-sham-be (or Me-ash-am-be) . 

Me-a-tube. 

Mal-la-ho-ka. 

]\futh-toon-bah. 

Mook-ah-hi-yah. 

Mah-la- (or Suckey). 

Mah-han-to-nah. 

Moon-tubbe (or Moon-tah). 

Mah-la-tubbe. 

Mint-tiibbee. 

Ma-ka-le. 

Muk-a-to-na. 

Mas-sa-la. 

Me-lin-ga-li-ah. 

Mat-he-chubbee. 

Mis-ta-i-a-ho-ka. 

Ma-ho-hit-ubbe. 

Ma-lis-sa. 

Mi-ha-ya-tubbe. 

Molly. 

Moon-tah. 

Mary. 

Maa-shem-a-ho-ka. 

Me-ah-tim-mah. 

Moon-tubbee. 

Me-he-ubbe. 

Mis-tubbe. 

Ma-ham-bee. 

Me-shi>m-kubbe. 

Mul-la-le-ho-nah. 

Mo-hah-to-nah. 

M-ha-che-ho-nah. 

Ma-ha-tai-omubbec. 

Me-hi-a-tubbee. 

Min-tubbce. 

Na-i-o-ka. 

Nancy. 

No-a-'te-ma. 

Nat. 

Nancy. 

Ne-take in-lubbee. 

No-wa. 

Nok-o-nubboo. 

Nok-anv-ta-ya. 

Nin-ta-ho-ma. 

Nock-ubba. 

Nock-iic-nii-yubbee. 

Mol-a-tubbcc. 

Nok-ne-a-tubbe. 

Nah-na-e-mah. 

Nah-sa. 



28 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, i54;^— Continued. 



Nock-a-way-chubbee. 

Nock-a-la-ho-te-mah . 

No-se-ho-nah. 

Ne-hi-ah-to-nah. 

No-ah-ho-tubbee. 

Nock-a-che-tubbee. 

Nock-a-na-ho-nubbee . 

No-la. 

No-ah-to-nubbee. 

Ne-la. 

Nock-a-na-chubbee . 

Nock-a-nubbee. 

Nock-e-a-chubbee (or Chub-bee). 

Na-chubbe (or Nock ne-chubbee). 

Nokis-tah-ahah. 

Nan-to-wah-yo. 

Nook-a. 

No-ke-mo-nubbe. 

No-wah-ho-ka. 

Nok-e-ne-ti-yah. 

Nock-un-ani-be. 

Nock-e-mah-shubbe . 

Nok-is-ni-ubbe. 

Nok-se-ka-tubbe. 

Nok-ish-to-nah. 

Nok-e-ne-ubbe. 

Nok-ko-ah-ho-mah . 

Ne-tock-oosh-tah . 

Nok-ish-tah-ok-la-tubbee. 

Nancy, or Un-an-che. 

Nok-ne-ho-tubbe. 

Na-po-le. 

Ne-le. 

Nok-e-na-tambe. 

Nok-e-mo-nubbe . 

Nok-ne-to-lubbe. 

Nok-ah-pe-sah. 

No-la. 

Nook-fa-lah (alias Ah-nook-pa-la). 

No-wah-ho-cubbe. 

Na-tubbe. 

Nock-i-o-tubbe. 

Nok-in-tambe. 

Nok- ne-hah-tah-e. 

Nuk-ok-ah-ho-mah. 

No-ah-ho-nah. 

Nok-e-chubbe. 

Nok-ne-ha-tubbe. 

Nok-ish-ti-yah. 

Nok-i-ne-lah. 

No-wah-te-mah. 

Ne-tock-am-be. 

Nok-is-tubba. 

Nok-ish-to-nubbe. 

Nu-vva-ho-ka. 

Nook-tah-lubbe. 

Nok-ho-raah. 

Nok-na-thub-be. 

Na-wabbe. 

Ne-tah-cubbe. 

Ne-tuk-o-ka. 

Na-o-ka. 

Nok-we-tah. 

Nok-e-wa-tubbe. 



Nok-ish-ti-ubbe. 

Nok-ho-tubbe. 

Noon-chubbe. 

Ne-tuk-ah-che. 

Nok-ne-la. 

Nok-e-ne-tubbe. 

Nok-a-ne-la. 

Nok-nam-be. 

No-wa-hubbe. 

Nok-a-shubbe. 

Nok-a-chubbe. 

Nok-ish-tah-shah . 

Ne-nok-kinm-bee. 

Nulth-la (or E-la-bo-ti-ah). 

Nok-ish-te-ubbe. 

Nok-neen-tubbee. 

Nok-e-ne-fe-nah. 

Ne-tuk-dh-chick-e-ma. 

No-wah-tam-be. 

Nuk-sho-pubbe. 

Nok-ne-ti-yah. 

Ne-ash-e-nubbe. 

Nok-ish-tam-be . 

Nok-a-man-che-ka-bee. 

Nah-ho-lo-mustubbe. 

Nok-ish-tubbee. 

Nook-wa-tubbe. 

Na-ho-sa. 

Nok-me-hat-tubbee. 

Nok-ho-ma-hajo . 

Nok-ish-to-tiah. 

Nok-ne-o-ka-tubbee . 

Nok-nin-che. 

Nok-ni-ta-hubbe. 

Nok-wan-be. 

No-wah. 

Nok-o-un-cha-hubbe . 

Nok-chu-nubbe. 

No-wah-ho-nah. 

Nok-ne-tubbe. 

No-la. 

Nah-sho-lah-ho-nah. 

No-sa-kah. 

Nush-ko-ho-to-ko-lo. 

Nock-e-ne-tubbe. 

No-wall. 

Nock-e-na-lah-nubbee. 

Nock-ne-a-che. 

Nok-ish-ti-yah. 

Ne-tah-che-to. 

Nock-fil-e-hi-yah. 

Nuk-she-pa-ubbe. 

Ne-tak-e-mah. 

No-sa-kah. 

Nok-ne-een-tubbe. 

Nu-\va-tom-bee. 

No-sa-kah. 

No-ah-tubbe. 

No-ah-hubbe. 

Nah-min-ah-ho-ka. 

No-h-ne-man-to-nah. 

Nock-a-ne-lah. 

Nah-ho-te-mah. 

Nock-ish-to-nubbee> 



INDIAN APPKOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 



29 



List of Mississippi Choctau' Indians in whose behalf scrip ivas issued under the provisions 
of the act of Conqress of Auq. US, 1842 — Continued. 



if Congress of Aug. 23, i5^;i'— Continued. 



Nan-no-ha-ho-nah . 

No-le-ham-be. 

Nok-ne-tubbe. 

Noke-e-ne-ene-hubbe. 

No-ko-she. 

Nok-is-tom-be. 

Ne-tuk-e-lubbe. 

No-a-ham-ba. 

No-kan-yo-ka-tu-na. 

Na-ne-ma. 

Nan-cha. 

No-cum-mah-ho-ka. 

No-ka-tah. 

No-wa-yah. 

No-wah-ta-kah. 

Nock-ho-mah-hah-cho . 

No-wa-ho-nah. 

Nan-ne-ubbe. 

No-sa-cubbe. 

No-quo-ah-tubbe. 

Nock-a-chook-ma. 

Nock-pe-la-sa. 

No-e-em-yea. 

Nok-a-ha-Ia-jee. 

No-la. 

No-a-ho-na. 

Nok-e-fil-la-ho-na. 

No-la-ho-na. 

Nok-pa-la. 

No-wah-he-mah. 

No-sho-bah. 

Nook-chin-tubbe. 

Na-wa-ho-ka. 

Nok-ne-o-ka-tubbee. 

Nok-an-e-tubbee. 

Nim-nok-ha-cubbe. 

No-wah-ho-ka. 

Nok-ish-te-mah-yubbe. 

Nook-fille (or l-il-le). 

Ona-tubbe. 

Oak-la-te-a. 

Oon-ta-che-a. 

Oon-te-a-tubbe. 

Ona-chee. 

Ona-ho-ka. 

Ok-pe-a-hubbee. 

Ok-le-me-i-a. 

0,s;lc-as-te-ma. 

Oke-c'ha-te-ma. 

Ona-tubbee. 

On-wa-ka. 

Ona-te-na. 

On-a-to hoyo. 

Og-]am-is-tubbee. 

0-na-ho-ka. 

0-on-la-cha. 

0-nok-fil-la-tubbee (alias lillatubbee). 

0-gki-hubbee. 

Oke-me-i-a. 

Ok-a-ish-ba-la-la. 

0-gle-a-te-ma. 

Ooon-ka-hubbee. 

0-glah-lio-nubbee. 

Ooon-tim-to-ka. 

0-nah-he-chubbee. 



Oon-nah-tom-tubbee. 

Ogle-ho-lah. 

0-gIah-non-nah. 

0-na-chubbee. 

Oo-nah-tubbee. 

Oke-la-we-tubbee (or Ohe-lin-tubbee). 

0-tim-po-nubbee. 

0-nah-te-ah. 

0-nah-tubbee. 

Oon-nah-ho-ka. 

Oon-a-tem-bee. 

Ogle-mi-o-nah. 

0-glah-no-wah-cha. 

0-nah-hubbee. 

Oon-na-ho-kee. 

0-nubbee. 

Oon-nah. 

Ow-wah-te-ah. 

0-gla-ham-bee. 

Oon-ta-ho-yo. 

0-quun-tah. 

Oon-ta-mah-chubbee. 

0-gla-ubbee. 

Ow-we-chah. 

0-lubbee-to-nah. 

Oppa-sah-he-mah. 

0-gla-ho-te-nah. 

Oon-tah-zubbee. 

0-thulck-a-ho-yo. 

Oon-ta-kah. 

Ok-lish-ti-ah. 

Oas-te-nubbe. 

Oon-ah-tubbee. 

Ok-chubbee. 

Ona-hin-hibbe. 

0-mol-le-tubbe. 

Oon-cha-la. 

Oon-ah-chubbe. 

Oon-ha-tubbe. 

Ok-la-ho-tubbee. 

Ok-che-tim-ah. 

Ok-lah-o-mah. 

Oon-te-ah-tubbee. 

Ok-la-me-ash-ali. 

Oon-ah-he-tubbe. 

Ok-'lah-tubbe. 

Oth-la-lio-'nah. 

Oon-ag-cliubbe. 

Oon-an-c-he-ah-tubbe. 

Ok-cha (or Ela-ok-chubbe). 

Oc-chock-ah-tubbe. 

Ok-in-to-la-ho-nah. 

Oon-ta-tubbe. 

Ok-lah-ho-tubbe. 

0()n-ubl)e. 

()k-ah-in-cliuk-mah. 

Ok-ish-te-niali. 

()k-la-lia-mah. 

()k-ah-che-ah. 

()k-lce-han-tubbe. 

Oon-te-ka-ah. 

Onah-te-mah. 

()k-lah-le. 

Ok-ish-tah-na. 

Ok-ah-fab-nia-ho-nah. 



30 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, lOll. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose h{ihalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 2.3, 1842 — Continued. 



0-na-te-ah. 

Ok-Iah-oka. 

Ok-le-mi-ubbe. 

Ok-lah-chubbe. 

Ok-hah-che-tah. 

Ok-i-yo-me-ho-nah. 

Oon-ali-hubbe. 

0-nah-hubbe. 

Ok-lah-tim-ah. 

Ok-po-clies-he-mah. 

0-ma-tubbe. 

Oon-ah-he-mah. 

Ok-la-o-nah . 

On-wak-ubbe. 

Oon-ah-hook-ta. 

Oon-wah-tubbe. 

Ok-ish-ta-mah-ho-mah. 

Ok-le-an-ne. 

Ok-lam-ba. 

Okisli-ti-yah (or Ish-ti-ah). 

Okis-tha-chock-ma-haka. 

Ok-a-hubbe. 

Ok-a-la-an-cha-hubbe. 

Ok-eha-tubbe. 

Ok-li-yah. 

Ok-ti-e-che-mah. 

On-te-ma-ho-zo. 

Ok-le-mi-yah. 

Okah-no-wah. 

Oon-te-mah. 

Oon-ti-o-mah. 

Oon-te-ah-tiibbe. 

Ok-lu-hubbe. 

Ok-ah-cbe-ah-honah. 

Ok-la-to-mah. 

0-kis-ti-yali. 

Ok-la-cbe-bo-ka. 

Ok-a-to-la-be-nah. 

Oon-ubbe. 

Ope-ab-kubbe. 

Ok-la-bo-nah. 

Okah-ta-ho-nab. 

Okis-tali-la-bo-nah. 

Ok-che-ha-to-nah . 

0-cbee. 

Onem-chehubbe. 

Ok-le-muttab. 

Ok-lab-yab-bo-nab. 

Ok-le-mab-cbe-ah-ho-nah. 

0-na-cbe-bubbe. 

On-ti-o-mah. 

0-na-ha-tubbe. 

Ok-la-bee. 

O-fa-bo-mab. 

Onab-bo-kab. 

0-na-he-mab. 

Oha-nubbe. 

On-tab-e-mab. 

0-nan-cbe-tim-ah. 

On-te-i-tubbe. 

On-te-kah. 

Ota-kubbe. 

O-te-ab-tubbe. 

Oke-la-lie-mah. 



Ok-la-no-wah. 

Ok-la-he-yubbee. 

Oon-ti-e-mab. 

Ok-lak-in-tubbe. 

Ok-lun-gee-hubbe. 

Ono-che-bubbe. 

Ok-li-ho-ka. 

Ochee. 

Obe-nab. 

Ok-cba-tiibbe. 

Ocbee. 

0-nab-che-ho-yo. 

Osh-ta-bab-ba. 

Ok-la-hubbee. 

0-tbah. 

0-nab-tah. 

Oath-la-cbe. 

0-ka-ish-te-e-mab. 

0-nab-be-niah. 

Ok-la-ho-nubbe (alias Muk-o-nubbe). 

Ok-cha-tubbe. 

Ok-la-she-ho-nab. 

Oon-ubbe. 

Ok-lah-he-mah. 

0-nab-tnbbe. 

Ok-li-ah. 

Oka-isb-te-niab. 

Oon-ab-bo-cbubbe. 

O-ka-in-chuck-nah. 

Oon-an-fba-bubbee. 

Oon-ab-he-mah. 

Oua-book-ta. 

Ouan-cbe-hubbe. 

Ok-cba-tubbe. 

Ok-la-hubbe. 

Ok-le-mo-mah. 

Ok-lo-hab. 

Ok-a-yo mab. 

Oo-naw-mab-o-tubbe. 

0-man-too-uah. 

Oun-tam-be. 

Oun-ab-ban-tubbee. 

Oun-ab-bo-yo. 

On-ta-cubbee. 

Ok-la-kin-ah. 

0<)U-ab-b(iok-tab. 

Ok-cba-tu-nah. 

Oon-to-ah-tubbe. 

Oon-ali-bo-uab. 

0-kish-ti-me. 

Ok-ah-sta-mah 

Ok-lab-cbe-bo-yo. 

Ok-is-tau-tah. 

Oo-tiib-ba. 

O-ne-nii-yali. 

Oo-hah-tubbe. 

Owa-tubbe. 

O-nab-chubbee. 

Oon-tba-bab-yo-tubbee. 

Og-li-ini-a. 

Ouu-uubbee. 

0-nali-fba-tubbee. 

0-kah-che-ab. 

Oon-take-ubbee (alias Take-ubbe). 



INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL^ 1917. 



31 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in tchose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 184^ — ^Continued. 



0-lah-tin-tiibbee . 

0-gle-o-iiah . 

Ok-is-te-ino-nah. 

Ok-la-ho-nah. 

Ok-ish-tal-o-hah-ho-ka. 

Onah-che-hain-be. 

Outh-la-hubbe. 

On-to-bah-nah. 

Oke-lish-ti-yah. 

Oon-a-liam-bee. 

Oon-hik-ah. 

Ok-lan-hoo-nah. 

0-ta-she-mak. 

Ok-labba (or Tap-pe-na-ho-ma). 

O-na-ho-ka. 

0-na-ham-bee. 

0-iia-he-ma. 

Ok-la-ha-la. 

0-nali-tick-ah. 

0-nah-ha-mah. 

Oon-shu-ah-ho-ka . 

O-niibbe. 

0-lah-hahii-cha. 

0-kah-ho-te-niah. 

0-nah. 

0-glock-ka-yo. 

0-glah-mah-ka. 

Oon-nook-a-mah. 

Oon-tock-ah-iie-ubbe. 

Oak-is- ta-cha. 

O-nook-cha (or Onook-chubbe). 

Ok-i-a-cha (alias Tah-nap-pe-ho-ja). 

0-mah-sha. 

O w-\va-cha-h o-nah . 

0-gle-a-tubbee. 

Ok-a-ha-chubbee. 

Oon-tan-tubbee. 

Oth-la. 

0-gla-o-ha-t ubbe . 

O-gla-ha-ma. 

0-hit-le-to-iia. 

O-y^e-ah-tubbe. 

Ok-la-ho-tiibbee. 

0-ka-lan-che-hubbee. 

Ob-la-lah. 

Ok-i!^-tah-lo-la. 

Ok-Ia-him-ah. 

Ok-la-lie-hibbe. 

Ok-chil-e-ht'ka. 

Oth-la-chiibbe. 

On-ah-ta-kah. 

Og-lali-ham-lee. 

Ona-tuV>be. 

Ok-li-vok-ubbe. 

Oli-o-ka. 

Ok-lah-ho-nah. 

Ohul-in-tubbe. 

Ok-lo-hab. 

Ok-a-la-che (or Ish-to-pah-nubbe). 

Ok-lali-o-nah. 

Oh-no-ho-te-ma. 

Ok-ish-tal-la-\vah-bo-nah. 

Oh-to-gah-lan-tubbe. 

0-gli-o. 



Oon-ah-tubbe (or Un-chu-tubbee). 

0-na-tubbee. 

0-gle-ash-ubbe. 

Ok-Ia-ka-tubbee. 

Ooclury, Pallas. 

Ooclury, George. 

Ooclury, Cyrus. 

0-glish-ti-yah. 

Oon-te-mah. 

Ok-ain-to-la. 

Pan-a-cha. 

Po-sho-a-tubbe. 

Pis-ubbe. 

Phillis. 

Pis-ha-lo-ti-ma. 

Pis-am-ok-an-tubbee . 

Pis-ak-a-chook-e-ma. 

Pis-a-tubbe. 

Pis-ah-o-te-ma. 

Pa-lam-a-ho-ka. 

Pa-shuth-lo-ke. 

Pa-le-sa-ho-ka. 

Paush-o-nubbee. 

Pom-fillah. 

Pis-ah-ke-a-tubbee. 

Pah-nah. 

Palla-machubbee. 

Pah-hah-cho. 

Pis-sah-hoke-ta. 

Phil-le-ti-ah. 

Pick-but-tah. 

Pal-la. 

Pusley. 

Pusk-co-chubbee. 

Phil-le-kah-ja. 

Pis-sah-ha-mah . 

Po-sha-to-nubbee. 

Peggy. 

Palla. 

Phil-le-mah. 

Peter. 

Pal-wah-chubbee. 

Pis-tick-e-ah. 

Pah-lam-mah. 

Pis-subbee. 

Po-tah. 

Po-nubbee. 

Pah-sho-nah. 

Pish-tan-ta-tubbee. 

Pah-sha-ho-te-mah . 

Picken.«!, Rachel. 

Po-lul)ba. 

Pa-tu})bo. 

Pc-lubl)o. 

Pis-ah-to-ke-mah. 

Pls-ah-ho-ka-tubbe. 

Pis-ah-lo-lio-ka. 

Pis-ah-ho-ka-tubba. 

Pah-nah . 

Pis-ah-tik-cubbe. 

Pis-ah-lo-ho-ka. 

Pis-ah-ho-ka-tubba. 

Pah-nah. 

Pis-ah-tik-cubbe. 



32 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1911. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under'J,hi\provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Pok-o-chubbe. 

Pe-sa-che-ho-nah. 

Pis-ah-tim-lah. 

Pis-ah-hom-be. 

Pa-sa-chubbe. 

Pis-a-ho-kah-tim-ah. ^ 

Pis-tek-e-ubbe. 

Po-tubbe. 

Pock-om-e-chubbe. 

Pock-ah-ma. 

Pe-le-ham-be. 

Pel-le-sah-ho-nah. 

Pis-ah-ehe-tubbe. 

Pe-ah-hubbe. 

Pith-le-le. 

Po-te-Ie-chubbe. 

Pis-te-ah-tubbe. 

Pun-all. 

Pis-ah-tu-nah. 

Phe-lin-tah. 

Pis-ah-tim-ah. 

Paunch-tunah. 

Pis-ah-chan-tubbe. 

Pis-ah-ho-chubbe. 

Po-nok-to-Chubbe. 

Po-shon -she-hubbe. 

Pul-ke-tubbe. 

Pis-ah-tam-be. 

Pis-ah-tish-ubbe. 

Phe-la-cha-ho-ka. 

Pis-ah-tim-o-nah. 

Pis-ah-chim-ah. 

Pa-la-chubbe. 

Pah-lubbe. 

Pe-tam-o-tubbe. 

Pis-ah-ho-tu-na. 

Pis-ah-ho-ka-tim-ah. 

Pis-is-tubbe. 

Pah-lah. 

Po-lah. 

Pis-subbe. 

Pis-ah-cho-ho-nah. 

Pis-took-chubbe . 

Pah-sah-che-mah. 

Pah-vali. 

Pul-ka-tiibbe. 

Pis-ah-ho-kah-tim-ah. 

Pis-ah-mok-in-tubbe. 

Pis-ah-ho-tim-ah. 

Pe-he-lo-tubbo. 

Pah-.«ah-ho-nah . 

Pon-the.*e-tubbe. 

Pa-la-sa-ho-mah. 

Pip-ah-chf'-ho-yo. 

Pash-ah-ho-mah. 

Pa-sha-ho-nah. 

Pig-ah-ho-nah . 

Pis-ah-tubbe (alias Ah-pa-sa-tambe). 

Phil-e-mo-yah. 

Pis-a-ham-bee. 

Pa-sah-te-niah. 

Pe-yah-ho-ka. 

Pis-ah-man-tublie. 

Pash-ah-ho-yo. 



Puk-an-ho-ka. 

Pi-yah-hooc-ta. 

Phil-e-ah-ho-yo. 

Phil-e-mon-te-kah. 

Pis-ah-cha-hubbe. 

Pis-sah-te-mah. 

Pul-Ie-ho-nah. 

Po-la-tubbe. 

Pis-sa-che-ho-yo . 

Pis-sa-ho-ka. 

Po-ka. 

Pah-lah-hubbe. 

Pah-ta-tubbe. 

Pis-sah-ho-nubbe. 

Pis-sa-ham-bee. 

Pis-sah-e-kah. 

Pis-8ah-ho-nah. 

Pis-to-pun-ne. 

Pis-sah-te-kah. 

Po-tah. 

Pis-e-ho-temah. 

Pis-sah-lah-he-mah. 

Pun-ubbe. 

Paush-ok-chi-ah. 

PiH-ah-to-nah. 

Po-ta-mah. 

Poush-is-nah-ho-mah. 

Pis-ah-on-te-mah. 

Pis-took-cha. 

Pa-nubbe. 

Pis-ah-to-she-mah. 

Pauyh-ok-chea. 

Poo-tah. 

Poush-is-to-nubbe . 

Pis-sah-che-te-mah. 

Poush-is-te-nubbe. 

Pa-sa-tubbe. 

Pe-ha-tubbe. 

Po-tah. 

Phil-e-ma-hubbe. 

Phil-e-moon-tubbe. 

Phil-e-ho-nubbe. 

Pa-.^a-tom-ba. 

Posh-e-mah. 

Pis-a-cha-tubbe. 

Posh-an-o-wabbee. 

Pas-cum-me. 

Pauhih-ik-ish-o. 

Pul-ka. 

Pis-sah-ka-to-nah. 

Pis-ah-ta-cubbe. 

Pis-te-ah. 

Pash-i-o-nah. 

Phil-o-moon-tubbe. 

Pash-ish-te-ubbe. 

Pis-i-to-kubbee. 

Pis-took-chah. 

Po-sis-ti-yah. 

Pis-sah-te-mah. 

Pul-lah. 

Pis-sah-mock-an-tubbe. 

Po-shah-tubbee. 

Pa-sah-ho-nah. 

Peg-ga. 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 1917. 



33 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Po-tho-tah. 

Pa-sam-bee. 

Phil-le-ah. 

Pus-sah-kah. 

Pis-sah-koke-ah-ta-mah. 

Pis-ah-kah. 

Po-shiit-tah. 

Pis-am-be. 

Pe-le-chubbe. 

Pis-ah-tim-ah. 

Posh-a-ma-ta-ka. 

Pis-ah-ti-ah . 

Pis-ah-o-gla. 

Po-tubbe. 

Pa-sah-ho-nah. 

Po-nah. 

Pis-ah-ish-no-wah. 

Pis-ah-ho-min-ah. 

Pes-ta-ge. 

Pah-na. 

Pe-no-la-Perry. 

Pis-a-tubbee. 

Po-to-tubbe. 

Pe-ah-shubbee. 

Pis-sah-hah-tubbe. 

Pah-sho-nah. 

Pis-sah-nah-to-nah . 

Po-shah-loke-ta (or Po-shock-ta). 

Pockin-am-bee. 

Pis-liubbee. 

Pash-ho-mah. 

Pocka-na-yah. 

Pe-tah. 

Pis-sah-tubbee. 

Pan-shisk-tu-na. 

Pi-al-e-ho-ka. 

Pis-a-to-nubbee. 

Pa-shulvba-tubbee. 

Po-cham-ba. 

Pa-sa-chubbee. 

Pis-a-be-tubbee. 

Posh-a-mus-tubbee . 

Pi-sa-te-a. 

Pia-aho-ka-tubbee . 

Peter. 

Puck-chuubbee. 

Puth-kin-tubbee. 

Pan-she-o-ha. 

Pa-sul)bee. 

Pah-ha-mah. 

Peel-ah-tubbee. 

Pis-ah-to-cubbee. 

Po-tiibbee. 

Pis-tah-ho-nah. 

Pis-ali-ho-nah. 

Pis-ah-ho-ka-to-nah . 

Pok-ah-kx-ho-nah . 

Pis-ah-te-niah. 

Po-she-mah. 

Pa-sha-ho-to-na. 

Pis-ah-jah. 

Poc-ah-loop-ka. 

Pis-at-i-ah. 

Pis-ah-che-ho-nah . 

25134— PT 4—16 3 



Pone-lah. 

Pis-took-chah. 

Poush-ish-to-nah . 

Pis-ah-she-te-mah . 

Pa-sah-ho-nah. 

Pis-ah-han-bee. 

Pis-sah-ho-to-mah . 

Pis-sah-ham-be . 

Po-to-tubbe. 

Pis-at-am-te-mah . 

Phil-e-men-tu-nah . 

Pis-sah-che-hubbee. 

Pil-ah-tubbe. 

Poon-tah. 

Peas-tubbe. 

Pis-ah-ha-lubbe. 

Pa-chul)lie (or La-pa-chubbee). 

Pis-ah-tubbee. 

Po-she-mah. 

Pen-mis-sah. 

Polly. 

Quah-na. 

Quish-tut-tah. 

Row-le. 

Raybarn. 

Sah-o-yo. 

Syla. 

Smith. 

Shi-mi-ah. 

Sukey. 

Sophy. 

Sampson. 

Susa. 

Shok-ta. 

Socka. 

Span-a-min-go. 

Stela. 

Stay matubbee. 

Stan-ti-ma. 

Si-e-na. 

Syop-a-tubbee. 

Shuk-a-tubbee. 

Sta-ta-he-ma. 

Ste-a-ho-te-ma. 

So-kin-nah. 

Stam-mah-han-to-mah. 

Shock-ko-yea. 

Shin-e-ah. 

Sina. 

Stim-ah-ha-tubbee . 

Stah-tubbee. 

Silis. 

Sta-ah-nubbee. 

Stil-la-chubbee. 

Sha-ho-ka. 

Sho-na-ho-ke-ta- (or T'ush-ho-nah). 

Sam . 

Sarah . 

Sho-mi-yah. 

Suckey. 

Sully-ho-yo. 

Sto-nah-chubbee. 

Sutte. 

vStah-na. 



34 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip ^vas issued under the provisiont 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Shum-to-nali . 

Sah-lio-nali. 

Shah-lah-lah. 

Sofa. 

Sho-mo-lahka. 

Sah-la. 

Sha-mah-ho-yo. 

Sill-la-ho-nah. 

Sak-e-tini-ah. 

She-mah-la-to-nah . 

Sha-ka-pa-ho-nali. 

Sho-tul)li('. 

Sal-la. 

Suck-a. 

Sham-pa-no-ka. 

Sam-me. 

Sho-uah. 

Sah-un-me-ho-ka . 

Sho-tim-ah. 

She-ko-pah-ho-iuah . 

Sah-tiibbe (or Pish-tubbe). 

She-ne-po-tubbe. 

Sho-te-mah . 

Shum-pa-la (or Chuink-ul-a-ka). 

Shan-io-tubbe. 

Sham-pi-e. 

Stah-nubbe. 

Sho-nah. 

Sile. 

Sha-ne-kia. 

She-se. 

Sham-ta-ho-ka. 

Sho-moon-tah . 

Sho-mah-la-tubbe. 

Ste-mok-ka-yo. 

She-mah-ho-yo. 

Sha-ka-ho-mah . 

She-mah. 

Stah-ho-nah. 

Shon-\va-no. 

Stuk-a-tubbo. 

Shu-wak-ki-yah. 

Sho-mi-yali . 

Stoo-nok-a. 

Ste-ma-lali. 

Stu-na. 

Sal-lie. 

Stea-le. 

She-ma. 

Sho-tubbe. 

So-kutchi. 

She-co-pam-be. 

Shi-ah-kah. 

Sal-le-ok-ka. 

Sok-ka-1 i-ah . 

Shah-ni-o-tubbe. 

Sally. 

Sal-lie. 

Sho-mah-ho-ka . 

Sham-bee. 

Sak-ka-tubbe. 

Sho-tubbec. 

Sum-e-hah-chubbe. 

She-co-pan-she-hubbe. 

Sha-nook-a. 



So-ma-ka. 

Sock-ki-a. 

Si-a-na. 

Sah-chah-ho-iiah. 

Sal-la. 

She-me-ho-ka. 

She-co-pah-lo-mah . 

Shim-to-nah. 

Sa-ho-yo. 

Shi-ka-jo-na-wa . 

Ste-ma-ho-yo. 

Solomon. 

Shah-pa-ja. 

Shi-yah. 

Sham-pi-o-nah . 

Sal-la. 

Smith. 

Shah-i)ah-ho-mah . 

Shah-mah. 

Sah-mi-o-ka. 

Sho-nak. 

Se-a-no-la. 

Sta-fa-na. 

Ste-a-tubbee. 

Si-e-la. 

Sta-lubbe. 

Sally. 

Sho-wa. 

Ste-ma-ho-yo-ho-na . 

Stan-cha (alias Ste-ma-ya, alias Kon-che). 

Sham-pi-a. 

Sti -ma-la. 

Sa-ba-la. 

Sin ah. 

Si-na. 

Shah-nah. 

Sham-tah-o-ka . 

Sah-ho-ba. 

Ste-ah-ho-ka. 

Sho-tubbee. 

Si-la. 

Tan-a-bon-ubbe. 

Tan-e-cha. 

Tan-a-chee. 

Tho-po-nubbe. 

Tom-pe-i-a. 

Tem-mepa-pona . 

Tik-conubbee. 

Tis-ho-chi-le-ta. 

Tahiibbee. 

To-ta-ho-yo. 

Ta-ho-na. 

To-i-ya. 

Tik-]m-tubbee. 

Tus-cubbeo-ha. 

Tus-ka-cm-itta. 

Tam-a-ho-la-na (alias Stam-a-ho-to-na). 

Tlk-lo-nubbee. 

Tis-jia-ham-ba (alias Tis-ho-ham-ba). 

Tik-beia. 

Tem-a-ka. 

Tam-a-ho-ua. 

Tal-a-ho-na. 

Tam-a-tiibbee. 

Tuk-a-la-ma-ho-na. 



INDIAN" APPEOPRIATION BILL, lOlT. 



35 



List of Mi 



<i Choctatv Indians in whose behalf scrip xoas issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



To-ta-ho-nia. 

Tillo-watubbe. 

To-lin-cha. 

To-ah-e-min-tubbee. 

Ti-yah. 

Tisli-o-ham-bee. 

Thock-o-fa-tubbee (or Thock-o-tubee). 

To-che-ah. 

Tah-hock-a-ma-tiibbee. 

To-mah-la-chah. 

Ta-cubbee. 

To-ma. 

Ta-hii-te-mah. 

To-ko-tah. 

Tish-o-])am-bee. 

Tal-wah-ham-bee. 

Tu?-ki-ali-leek-ah. 

Tick-a-lin-tubbee. 

Tick-but- tab. 

Tith-la-ho-nah. 

Tim-am-ho-tubbee . 

Temiepee. 

Thompson. 

To-no-wah. 

To-nah. 

Ti-ee-nah. 

Tah-ho-yo. 

To-cba. 

Tock-ah-la-to-nah. 

Ta-cubbee. 

Tock-ki-ah-chah-ho-nah . 

Tah-ho-nah. 

Ta-mah. 

Te-mi-yah-tubbee. 

To-mah-ho-yo. 

Tim-min-ta-hubbee. 

Tah-ho-ka. 

Tush-a-min-tnbbee. 

Tah-ho-Ia-tubbee. 

To-ki-ah-Carnes. 

Tish-ah-ho-uubbee. 

Tick-lain-bee. 

Tak-ho-ka. 

To-]jah. 

To-niah -ho-nu bbee . 

To-no-te-mah. 

Ta-ba-cha. 

Tille-mah. 

Tah-no-wah. 

To-me-hattah. 

Tick-be-too-lah. 

To-tubbe. 

T()ok-]a-he-mah. 

Tith-ho-tubbee. 

To-ma. 

Ton-ubboe. 

Tah-iie-cluibbc. 

Tosho-ah-ho-nah. 

Tak-a-lam-be. 

Tha-o-hubbee. 

Thlo-po-tubbe. 

Tah-ish-cam-bf*. 

Te-aske-ho-mah. 

Tim-ah-ha-t \i bbe . 



Tin-lah. 

Tam-bee (alias Pis-tam-bee.) 
Tah-ho-nah. 
To-ni-ya. 
Tub-be-ce. 
Tack-ah-lam-be. 
Te-lan-ah-che. 
Tah-ho-yah-hc -nah. 
Tick-ba-ho-nah. 
Tush-ho-nah-tah. 
Tali-he-kah. 
Te-me-ak-ke. 
Ta-to-bah. 
To-no-ho-ka. 
Tik-e-tim-ah. 
Tah-hah-ba. 
Tah-bc-kah. 
To-sho-yo-ho-nah . 
Tan-ne-too-nah. 
To-hubbe. 
Tan-tubbe. 
To-chubbe. 
Tith-le-le. 
Too-lah-tubbe. 
Ta-cubbe. 
To-ho-nah-te-mah . 
Te-ho-bah-tubbee . 
Tith-li-ah-ho-nah. 
Tah-lo-wah. 
To-nah. 
Tah-pe-nah. 
Tiin-o-nah. 
Tith-lo-o-mte-ah. 
Tim-ma-la-ha-cha . 
Tah-pah-lah. 
Te-he-kah. 
Te-ah-ho-nah. 
Tith-le-le-ho-ka. 
Tish-o-pi-ah. 
Te-mah-lah-chee. 
Tah-nah-ho-nah. 
Te-mah-lah. 
Thlo-pulla. 
Tish-o-no-wah-tubbe . 
Tik-ba-ho-tubbe. 
Ta-nam-po-tubbe . 
Tone-ubbe. 
Tak-al-ah-tim-ah . 
Ta-shu-tubbe. 
Tik-ba-ho-tubbe. 
Tah-ho-ye. 
Tusko-lotto. 
To-nah. 
Tack-cubbe. 
Te-nxi-ah-ho-yo. 
Tan-pe-na-hubbe . 
To-la-ho-nah. 
To-ba. 

Tish-n-no-wa-tubbe. 
Tom-e-hi-yo. 
Tim-all-no-la. 
Tik-bah-ho-nah. 
Tan-oon-i-o-cubbe . 
• Took-a-chubbe. 



36 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 

of the act of Congress of Aug. 2S, 1842 — Continued. 



Tick-e-bah. 

Tick-lah-oo-nah. 

Tan-up-pi-yah. 

Tah-ho-nah. 

Tah-Hubbe. 

Took-a-loon-tubbe . 

To-te-mus-tubbe. 

Tik-li-yah. 

Tal-lo-wah-ho-nah . 

Took-la-ho-na. 

To-bah-tam-ya. 

Tali-neen-cha. 

Tok-ka-la-too-nah . 

Tah-ho-nah. 

Te-mah-he-mah. 

Tah-ka-Ia-to-nah. 

Tah-hubbe. 

Tal-wah. 

Ta-hiibbe. 

To-ah. 

To-ni-a. 

Te-bah-noo-kubbe. 

Tah-nin-to-nah. 

Tik-e-lah. 

Tah-ho-nah. 

Tah-nap-ha-cubbe. 

Te-mah-tam-be. 

Tah-ne-ho-nah. 

Tus-ka-a-to-kah. 

Take-ho-yo. 

Tah-hubbe. 

To-bul-la. 

To-te-pi-ya. 

Tah-no-wah. 

Tah-we-wah-ho-nah . 

Tik-lo-nubbe. 

To-noon-cha. 

Te-me-ah-ho-nah . 

To-pe-lah. 

Toon-lah-ho-nah. 

Tah-mah-hoke-chiah. 

Tan-ke-yo. 

Tah-mah-ha-lubbe. 

To-te-ho-yo. 

Tah-e-min-tubbe. 

Tah-mah-le-lubbe. 

Te-lubba. 

Tellis. 

Tik-bone-te-mah. 

Tik-bah-he-mah. 

To-me-hubbe. 

Tib-bah-ubbe. 

Took-la-ho-na. 

Te-mo-nah. 

Tish-ok-chia. 

Tok-o-la-tubbe. 

Tash-pa-ho-ka. 

Te-mah. 

To-kal-la-tubbe. 

To-hih-tubbe. 

To-kah-ho-nah. 

Te-ho-yo. 

Tike-be-ubbe. 

Tim-e-tubbe. 



Te-mi-yea. 

To-pa-ho-mah. 

Ti-yea. 

Te-nah. 

Tal-o-wah-ho-nah. 

Tal-ne-ho-yo. 

Te-mah. 

Toon-la-ho-nah. 

To-ho-lah. 

Tah-honah. 

Te-mah. 

To-lah-hubbe. 

Ta-she-co. 

Te-ok-ho-mah. 

To-hee-le. 

Tah-the-ho-nah. 

Tash-pah-tubbe. 

Te-meen-tah-ho-nah. 

Tebbe-ho-mah. 

Tus-co-chi-am-be. 

To-kah. 

Too-nah. 

Tin-to-tubbe. 

Tik-lah-tubbe. 

Tam-mo. 

Te-mam-ba. 

Ta-bo-kah. 

Ta-ho-nah. 

Te-ho-yo. 

Tiish-pah-tubbe. 

Tah-nubbe. 

Tibbe-ho-nah. 

Tith-i-o-tubbe. 

To-lah-ho-nah.- 

To-ne. 

Took-ah-lam-be. 

To-wah-noo-hah . 

Ta-wamp-ha-cubbe . 

To-sho-yo-tubbe. 

Tan-e-tubbee. 

Tim-ah-no-la-ho-nah. 

Te-ah-ho-yo. 

Talh-le-yo. 

Take-un-i-ye. 

Tan-u-wa-ho-nah . 

Ti-o-nah. 

Tus-ka-ha-kah. 

Te-lo-way. 

Te-1he-ubbe. 

Tush-kam-ba. 

Tah-pe-nam-be . 

Tish-o-mus-tubbe . 

Ta-nam-pis-te-ubbe. 

Te-lah-ho-nah. 

Thki-k«-fa-che. 

To-tam-bee. 

Tiish-pa-o-ka. 

Ti-am-ba. 

Tah-no-le. 

Tah-ho-ye. 

Tan-uth-la-che. 

Ta-nam -pa-ha-ka . 

Tith-lah-ho-nah. 

Tonk-le. 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 



37 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in'ivhose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress j)f Aug . 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Tal-wah-ho-nah. 

To-pah-ho-nah. 

Te-ho-mus-tiibbee . 

Tan-o-wa-tubbe. 

Tik-lo-nubbee. 

Tah-fa-mah. 

To-nam-pish-ubbe. 

Tah-nin-tubbe. 

To-nubbee. 

Te-cumseh. 

Taylor, Peggy. 

To-nah. 

Ti-ock-he-im-lubbee. 

To-ke-o-to-nah. 

Taylor, Pirena, 

Taylor, Hester A. 

Taylor, David F. 

Tal-wah-to-nah. 

Te-mah-lah. 

Te-a-he (or Is-te-an). 

Ta-ka. 

Tick-bone-tah-yubbe (orhubbe). 

Tik-ah-lut-tah. 

To-tubbe. 

Te-me-ho-ka. 

Ta-pe-ne-hubbe. 

Tish-o-tubbe. 

Tus-kam-bee. 

Ta-nam-pa-cha. 

Te-ah-ho-yo. 

Tah-hubbe. 

Tah-me-ne-lubbe . 

Te-ma-yo-la. 

Tap-pe-na-ho-ma. 

Thomas. 

Tan-ti-ma. 

To-kubbee. 

Tuk-a-lubbee. 

Tock-o-la-tubbe. 

Tus-ka-chuck-ah-mah. 

Tah-Ja-ho-lubbe. 

Tush-cu])be (or Tus-cuppa). 

Tah-na-hin-po. 

To-nubbe. 

Tus-ka-ho-ma. 

To-hah. 

Ta-hol-ba-tubbe. 

Tish-o-ham-bee. 

Te-ah-pahn-tah. 

Tah-li-yah. 

Took-lah-bee. 

Tus-sah-hah. 

Tah-nap-pe-ho-ja. 

Tith-le-tam-be. 

Tho-po-tubbee. 

Tus-sa-ha. 

Tan-na-i)ish-wa. 

Ta-mo-la-ho-na. 

Tal-la-hubbee. 

Tith-lo-ya. 

To-ta. 

Ta-hom-ba. 

Tith-a-la. 

Tish-a-ko-nubbee . 



Ta-mo-a-ho-na. 

Tap-pa-non-che-a. 

Tus-ca-no-la. 

Tal-la-wa-ho-na. 

Tish-o-emitta. 

Tish-o-chi-le-ta. 

Tuk-a-la-nubbee . 

Tom. 

Tal-wah-ho-ke-ta. 

Te-mah. 

Un-me-hah-to-nah . 

Un-ah. 

Un-t ah-she-mah . 

Un-nah-che-he-mah . 

Un-ta-ho-te-mah, 

Un-tah-tiibbe. 

Ul-la-che-mah. 

Un-ah-to-lubbe. 

Un-te-ah-tubbe. 

U-lan-le-tubbe. 

Un-te-cum-e-ubbe . 

U-\ve-te-mali. 

Un-ah-to-lubbe. 

Un-ah-le-ho-ka. 

Un-te-ah. 

Un-tah-tubbe. 

Un-te-chubbe. 

Un-che-le. 

Ulth-la-ho-nah. 

Un-te-raah-ho-nah . 

Ush-wah-ho-nah . 

Ut-tut-te-mah. 

Us-tah-hi-ah. 

Ulth-lo-tah. 

Un-ah-timah. 

Ut-tut-e-mah. 

Ul-ah-we-lah (or Ah-bo-we-la) . 

Utul-bee (or His-tubbee, alias 

Shoat). 
Ush-we-tubbee. 
Up-pa-hubbee. 
Un-ah -tubbee. 
Wak-a-tubee. 
Was-kin. 
Wa-ta-ho-yo. 
Washington. 
Wesley. 
Wa-to-ho-yo. 
Winna. 
Wausa. 
Wallace. 
Wale. 

Ward, Nicholaa. 
Wah-ha-chah. 
Wilson, Tom. 
Wi-o-ka. 

Wah-ki-o-nubbee . 
William. 
Wilson. 

Wah-ah-o-tubbe . 
We-ah-ish-to-nah. 
Wak-ah-che-ho-yo . 
Wak-ah-tubbe. 
Wah-kah-tubbe. 



Mr. 



38 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL^ 1917. 



List of Mississippi Choctaw Indians in whose behalf scrip was issued under the provisions 
of the act of Congress of Aug. 23, 1842 — Continued. 



Wak-ah-ho-nah. 

Wa-tiibbe (or Oan-wah-tubbe) 

Wah-kah-a-te-mah . 

Wash-ko-mah . 

Wa-li. 

Wah-li (or Billy). 

Wal-lee. 

Wak-a-tu-nah. 

Wa-te-mah. 

Wak-i-chubbee. 

Wak-i-e-to-nah. 

Wak-i-o-tubbe. 

Win-ne. 

Wizy. 

Wah-tubbe. 

Wak-a-to-nah . 

Wak-io-nubbe. 

Way-tubbe. 

Way-ta-ho-nah. 

Way-te-mah. 

Wah-ki-ah. 

Wa-la-ho-nah. 

William. 

Wah-kin. 

Willis. 

Wah-tubbe. 

Wak-is-tubbee. 

We-tuck-eeu-lubbee . 

Wak-ka-te-i-a. 

Wak-i-ah-te-ah. 

Walls. 

Wak-kin. 

William. 

\\'ashington 

Win-na. 

Wak-a-tubbee. 

Wa- k a-i-bn-ubbee . 

Wacka-ya. 

Wa-a-ho-na. 

Wa-chah. 

Wah-ka-ho-ke-tali. 

Wah-ki-o-tubbe. 

We-ah-ho-nah. 

Wa-te-mah. 

Way-tubbe. 

Yalla-ma. 

Yim-me-tubbee. 

Yaco-tona. 

Yo-k-odee-tubbee. 

Yaceomma. 

Ya-co-to-na. 

Yak-on-tubbee. 

Yo-ca-ta. 

Yimma-ho-ka. 

Yimma-tubbee. 

Yac-o-tam-ba. 

Yak-a-hajo. 

Ya-ka=pa. 

Yim-ma. 

Yim-min-tah. 

Yock-a-tubbee. 

Yock-a-ma-tubbee. 

Yock-a-ma-tubbee. 

Yocko-tah-nubbee. 



Yo-kah, or Tiyah. 

Yow-wah-to-nah . 

Yun-ma. 

Yon-ah-ti-kah. 

Ye-min-tah-ho-nah. 

Yok-o-tim-ah. 

Yem-e-ti-ah. 

Yim-ish-lah-nah. 

Yok-o-tubbee. 

Yok-ko. 

Yok-o-me-too-nah . 

Yok-o-me-cha-ho-nah . 

Yem-e-ti-ah. 

Yo-hah-tubbee. 

Yim-mo-nubbee. 

Yok-o-me-tim-ah. 

Yok-io-tim-ah. 

Yum-ah-to-nah. 

Yem-ah-ho-ka. 

Yok-ah-ho-nah. 

Yo-ba. 

Yew-o-nubbe. 

Yok-ah-ham-be. 

Yo-hubbe. 

Yon-ah. 

Yon-ah-tah. 

Yon- wall. 

Yun-e-chubbe. 

Yok-a-tubbe. 

Yan-ish-lak-nah. 

Yok-ah-to-nah. 

Yok-o-te-mah. 

Yo-pal-lah. 

Yok-me- tam-be . 

Yol-nubbe. 

Yok-no-la. 

Yem-ak-ah-tubbe. 

Yem-e-tubbe. 

Yok-ah-tubbee. 

Ye-me-tubbe. 

Yah-mak-in-tubbe. 

Yam-moon-tubbee. 

Ye-ah-tam-l.ee. 

Yazoo-ho-pi-a. 

Yok-me-tubbee. 

Yah-kubbee. 

Yem-e-tublie. 

Yok-a-tam-be. 

Yok-mi-ti-ah. 

Yock-ma-c hubbee . 

Yim-min-tubbee. 

Yim-mah-ho-wah . 

Yok-ko-me-ah. 

Yock-ah. 

Yok-a-tam-bee. 

Yo-ka. 

Yahk. 

Yo-pul-lah-ho-nah . 

Yok-o-ta-hah-chubbee . 

Ya-ta. 

Yo-ca-chubbee. 

Yah-ho-ka-te-nah . 

Yock-a-te-nah. 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, 1917. 39, 

Ml'. MuRiiAY. There is a public docuniout giving them, too. 

Mr. Ferris. Yes, there is a ])iibhc document, but I got these from 
the Indian Office. 

Mr. Dill. Wlien was tlie act of Congress passed? 

Mr. Ferris. I think it was in 1S37. 

Mr. Harrison. The scrip proposition was in 1842. 

Mr. Ferris. What actually happened was this: The Indians that 
remained first had a series of years wlien they could take land if they 
wanted it, and in large areas, and there were 10,000,000 acres remain- 
ing there to give it to them, but only 143 families would exercise that 
right. Then Congress came alono; in 1842 and said, ''if you won't 
take the actual land we will give it to you anyhow by scrip." This 
Congress did. and they received it and there is and can be no doubt 
about it. 

:Mr. Murray. They left them 10,000,000 acres to tak(> from. They 
only got a total of 11,000,000. 

Mr. Ferris. That is true. 

Mr. Harrison. The scrip was issued with the understanding that 
half of it should be issued in Mississippi and the other half in Okla- 
homa. 

Mr. Ferris. That is true. The other 3,400 out of the approxi- 
mately 4,000 went over and got the rest of its money at $1.25 an 
acre. And their names are here. Nearly all of them emigrated to 
Oklahoma after they had received land in Mississippi and became 
full beneficiaries in Oklahoma also. 

Now, gentlemen, here is the attitude of these people — these treaty 
relations with these people happened almost 100 years ago — 96 years 
ago — these Indians, a good many of them, had been over to Okla- 
homa at one time and another and received not only their pro rata in 
Mississippi but likewise received certam lands and payments in 
Oldahoma. Then some of them journeyed back to Mississippi where 
they desned to live. Their descendants live there now. Of course 
the treaty Indians are long since dead. One hundred years have 
elapsed since then, but their scattering and remnant descendants, 
mixed blood, intermarried with every people on earth, are still there. 

Dropping back now to the fourteenth article, which is the only 
claim that they have ever claimed or had — it is all that Senator John 
Sharp "Williams, or that Mr. Harrison makes, and if they have any 
rights at all it is under that. Now my colleagues and I from Oklalioma 
might tell you one thing, and the Members from Mississippi would 
tell you still another thing. Now let us see what the courts will tell 
us, and let us see what the Secretaries of the Interior tell us, what the 
Dawes Commission tells us, all dealing with this precise section 14. 
Members of the committee who have not given f^reat attention to 
this might well go astray following me; they might perchance go 
astray following the Mississippi delegation, but certainly they can 
not go astray if they follow the courts empowered to pass upon this 
thing when it does pass upon it. 

I hold in my hand an exact copy of the Jack Amos decision, which 
is the decision of a Federal court passing on this precise section 14 
of the treaty of 1837. This case arose in the regular way. Jack 
Amos, a full-blood Mississippi Choctaw in 1896, with 97 full-blood 
Choctaw Indians came before the Dawes Commission in Oklahoma 
and said, "We arc unwilling to remove to Oklahoma, but under the 



40 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

fourteenth article we are entitled to stay in Mississippi and enjoy 
the full rights of citizenship. They said by their petitions and by 
their argument then precisely what Mr. Harrision says now. 

JACK AMOS ET AL. AGAINST THE CHOCTAW NATION. 

In this case the proof shows that the claimants are Choctaw Indians by blood now 
living in the State of Mississippi; that neither they nor their ancestors have ever 
removed into the present Choctaw Nation. 

The claimants base their right to be enrolled as Choctaw citizens upon the term of the 
second and fourteenth articles of the treaty negotiated at Dancing Rabbit Creek on 
September 27, 1830, and of the conditions of the patent to the lands of the Choctaw 
Nation executed by President Tyler in the year 1842. (Durant Ed. Choctaw Laws, p. 
81.) 

Articles 2 and 14 of the treaty of 1830 are as follows: 

■'Art. 2. The United States, under a grant specially to be made by the President of 
the United States, shall cause to be conveyed to the Choctaw Nation a tract of country 
west of the Mississippi River in fee simple to them and their descendants, to inure to 
them while they shall exist as a nation and live on it, beginning near Fort Smith, 
where the Arkansas boundary crosses the Arkansas River, running thence to the 
source of the Canadian Fork, if in the limits of the United States, or to those limits; 
thence due south to Red River, and down Red River to the west boundary of the Terri- 
tory of Arkansas; thence north along that line to the beginning, the boundary of the 
same to be agreeable to the treaty made and concluded at Washington City in the year 
1825. The grant to be executed so soon as the present treaty shall be ratified. 

"Art. 14. Each Choctaw head of a family being desirous to remain and become a 
citizen of the States shall be permitted to do so by signifying his intention to the agent 
within six months from the ratification of this treaty; and he or she shall thereupon be 
entitled to a reservation of one section of 640 acres of land, to be bounded by sectional 
lines of survey; in like manner shall be entitled to one-half of that quantity for each 
unmarried child which is living with him over 10 years of age, and a quarter section to 
such child as may be under 10 years of age, to adjoin the location of the parent. If they 
reside upon said lands, intending to become citizens of the States, for five years after 
the ratification of this treaty, in that case a grant in fee simple shall issue. Said reser- 
vation shall include the present improvements of the head of the family or a portion of 
it. Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw 
citizen, but, if they ever remove, are not to be entitled to any portion of the Choctaw 
annuity." 

The conditions of article 2 of the treaty, that the land should be conveyed "to 
the Choctaw Nation in fee simple to them and their descendants, to inure to them 
while they shall exist as a nation and live on it," are earned into the patent, and are 
the only portions of that instrument which shed any light on the question now being 
considered, and therefore article 2 and the conditions of the patent may be considerd 
together. 

The whole object of the treaty of 1830 was to procure the removal, as far as practi- 
cable, of the Choctaw people to the lands west of the Mississippi which they now 
occupy. The Supreme Court of the United States, in the case of the Choctaw Nation 
V. United States (119 U. S., 36), after reviewing the treaties of 1820 and 1825, says: 

"In the meantime, however, under the pressure of the demand for settlement of 
the unoccupied lands of the State of Mississippi by emigrants from other States, the 

f)olicy of the United States in respect to the Indian trilaes still dwelling within its 
)orders underwent a change, and it became desirable, by a new treaty, to effect, as 
far as ])racticable, the removal of the whole body of the Choctaw Nation, as a tribe, 
from the limits of the State to the lands which had been ceded to them west of the 
Mississippi River. To carry out that policy the treaty of 1830 was negotiated." 

Again in the case, page 27, the court says: 

"It is notorious as a historical fact, as it abundantly appears from the records of 
this case, that great pressure had to be brought to bear upon the Indians to effect 
their removal, and the whole treaty was evidently and purposely executed not so 
much to secure to the Indians the rights for which they had stipulated as to effectuate 
the ])olicy of the United States in regard to their removal." 

Articled of the treaty of 1830 stipulates that the Choctaws agree to remove all of 
their people during the" years 1831, 1832, and 1833 to those lands! (7 Stat. L., 333.) 

Article 14 of the treaty, however, provides for certain privnleges and rights for those 
who might choose to remain in Mississippi with a view to becoming citizens of that 
State. They and their descendants were to receive certain lands and, after living on 



INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL^ 1917. 41 

them for five years, intending to bccoine citizens of the State, these lands were to ba 
granted to them in fee simple. Then fellows this very peculiar clause: 

"Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the pri\ilege of a Choctaw 
citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any portion of the Choctaw 
annuity." 

The difficulty in construing this clause of the treaty is to ascertain the meaning 
of the word "remove." To what does it relate and how shall we give it meaning? 
It certainly does not purpose to impose a penalty on the Cho( taw who may choose 
to remove for removing, and for that reason forfeit his right to the anniiity, bee ause, 
so long as he remained in Mississippi he was not entitled to any annuity, and, there- 
fore, by removing he could not forfeit that which he did not have. If he removed, 
he was to haA'e no annuity, and if he remained he was to have no annuity. It is 
evident, therefore, that the word was not used for the purpose of forfeiting the annuity 
in case of removal. Then, what are its uses? The very objec t of the treaty was to 
procure a removal of these people. 

The whole of the Choctaw Nation, with all of its sovereignty, its powers, and its 
duties, was to be transferred beyond the Mississippi. It was to exeri ise its powers, 
confer its privileges, and maintain the citizenship of Its people in another place. 
Those who were left behind were to retain not this Cho( taw citizenship r)ut only 
the ' ' pri\'ileges of a Chor taw citizen. ' ' That is, that when they put themselves into a 
position that these privileges cotdd be conferred upon them they were to have them, 
and under the conditions and purposes of this treaty how woidd it be possible for 
them to put themselves in such a position without first remo\'ing within the territoiial 
jurisdiction of the Choctaw Nation and within the sphere of its powers? What privi- 
lege would it be possible for the Choctaw Nation to confer, or a Mississippi Choctaw 
to receive, so long as he remained in Mississippi and out of the limits of the Choctaw 
Nation? By the very terms of the treaty they were to become citizens of another 
State, owing allegiance to and receiving protection from another sovereignty. If 
one Mississippi Choctaw were to commit a ■wTong against the person or property of 
another, the right would be enforced and the wrong redressed under the laws of Mis- 
sissippi. The Choctaw Nation would be powerless to act in such a case. The Choc- 
taws in that State can not vote, sit as jtirors, or hold office as a Choctaw citizen or 
receive any other benefit or privilege as such. They can not participate in the rents 
and profits of the lands of the Choctaw Nation, because by the very terms of the 
grant the (JhoctaAv people and their descendants must live tipon them. If they do 
not, it is an act of forfeiture, made so by the provisions of article 2 of the treaty of 
1830, and also of those of the patent to their lands afterwards executed. 

The title of the Choctaw people to their lands is a condi ional one, and one of the 
conditions of the grant, expressed in both the second article of the treaty of 1830 and 
the patent, is that the grantee shall live upon them. And who are the grantees? 
Who are these people who are to live upon the land? Unquestionably the Choctaw 
people and their descendants; for, while the grant is to the ('hoctaw Nation, the 
people seem to be included, both as grantees and beneficiaries. The language of the 
treatv is, and it is carried into the patent: 

"The President of the United States shall cause to be conveyed to the Choctaw 
Nation a tract of country west of the Mississippi River, in fee simple, to them and 
their descendants, to inure to them while they shall exist as a nation and live on it." 

The Choctaw Nation is not "them" and can not have "descendants." And while 
it may exercise its sovereignty and its national powers within certain defined terri- 
torial limits, it can not "live cm land." Those provisicms of the grant wliich are 
expressed in the jilural and attach to "descendants" and which require as a condi- 
tion that the land shall be lived on beyond doul)t refer to the Clioctaw people and 
their descendants. Whatever effect upon the title tlie limitation upon the rights of 
alienation expressed in the patent, so that the lands c-an not be sold except to the 
grantor or by its consent, may have, there can be no ciuestion l)ut that tiie second 
article of the treaty of 1830, nc^gotiated 12 years before the execution of the patent, 
and in which no limitation on the right of alienation is expressed, was intended to 
convey a fee-.simple title, burdened by two conditicms subsequent, the one that the 
grantees .should continue the corporate existence of tlieir nation, and the other that 
the people of that nation and their descendants should forever live upon the land. 
A failure of cnther would work a forfeiture of the title to (he grantor. 

Now, why was it that this fees-simple title was to be burdened by the condition that 
the grantee must live on the land? In the light of the knowledge of the conditions 
that then existed the answer is plain. The policy of the Federal (iovc?rnn)ent at that 
time relating to the Indian tribes, was to move them upon a reservation and keep 
them there; and if the Indians, either singly or in numbers, shotdd stray off, soldiers 
with guns and bayonets were used to drive them back. This very treaty was negotiated 



42 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

with the Choctaws for that very purpose. Hence the condition in the grant that they 
should live on the land or it should be subje'^t to forfeiture to the United States. 
This condition was inserted for two reasons: First, to compel the grantees to remove 
upon the lands; and, second, to compel them to remain on them after removal. It 
was not intended that some should go and locate on the lands and hold the title for 
themselves and also for the others who shoidd choose to remain. This woiUd defeat 
the very object of the conditions. These lands were conveyed to the Choctaw people 
to be held by them as tenants in common. This intention of the second article of 
the treaty of 1830 is expressed by the Tise of the words "them and their descendants" 
and of tlie clause that they were to "live on the land." Both of these clauses are 
expressed in the plural, and evidently do not relate to the nation as a corporate body. 
That a tenancy in common was intended is made clear by a consideration of section 3 
of an act of Congress entitled "An act to provide for an exchange of lands with the 
Indians residing in any of the States or Territories, and for their removal west of the 
Mississippi River," approved May 28, 1830 (4 U. S. Stat. L., 412). The section reads 
as follows: 

"Anrl be it further enoctecl. That in the making of any such exchange or exchanges 
it shall and may be lawful for the President solemnly to assure the tribe or nation 
with whif'h the* exchange is made that the United States will forever secure and 
guarantee to them and their heirs or successors the country so exchanged with them 
and, if they prefer it, that the United States will cause a patent or grant to be made and 
executed to them for the same: Provided ahvays. That such lands shall revert to the 
United States if the Indians become extinct or abandon the same." 

At the time the treaty of 1830 was negotiated (Sept. 29, 1830) this act had been on 
the statute books of the United States for four months, and as a matter of course the 
commissioners to negotiate the treaty were familiar with it. But the language used 
in this act to limit the estate is "to "them, their heirs, or successors." The language 
used in the treaty to limit the estate therein granted is "in fee simple to them and 
their descendants," and then conditions are attached not named in the statute. Why 
the word "successors" was left out of the treaty is plain, but why the word "heirs" 
was changed to the word "descendants," unless it was that a word should be used 
within the comprehension of those untutored Indians, who knew nothing of the tech- 
nical phrasing of the common law used in the conveyance of real estate, is not easy 
to determine. The word "successors" was omitted from the treaty because by its 
terms the Choctaw Nation was to ha^-e no successors. They were to live on the land 
forever or it should be forfeited to the grantor. When the technical words "succes- 
sors" and "heirs" were dropped and the common word "descendants" was used, 
these Indians could understand it. They knew that they and their offspring were. 
It was to them — the people and their children — that the land was sold ; and when the 
condition was added that the grant was to be made to them and their descendants only 
in the e^-ent that they shovild liA'e upon the lands, they could not but understand that 
this implied a removal to and a continual residence upon them. 

As a further evidence that the parties understood that by this transaction the land 
was to be held in common by the people, the treaty of 1833, article 1. proA-ides, after 
describing the lands, as follows: 

"And pursuant to an act of Congress approved May 28, 1830, the United States do 
hereby forever secure and guarantee the lands embraced within the said limits to the 
members of the Choctaw and Chickasaw tribes, their heirs and successors, to be held 
in common, so that each and every member of cither tribe shall have an equal undi- 
vided interest in the whole: Provided, however. No part thereof shall CA-er be sold 
without the consent of both tribes and that said land shall revert to the United States 
if said Indians and their heirs become extinct or abandon the same." (4 U. S. Stat. 
L., 276.) 

If this be true there is no holding in trust by the corporate body of the Choctaw 
Nation for the benefit of the people, but the people themselves have the title and hold 
in common. 

"A tenancy in common is a joint estate in which there is unity of possession but 
separate and distinct title. The tenants have separate and independent freeholds c)r 
leaseholds in their respective share, which they manage and dispose of as freely as if 
the estate was one in severalty. * * * The interest of one tenant in common is so 
independent of that of his colenant that in a joint conveyance of the estate it would 
be treated as a grant to each of his own share of the estate." (Tiedeman on Real 
Property, 235.) 

And therefore any condition of the grant would be as binding on each of the tenants 
in common as if the estate was in severalty and vested in the individual tenant. 
And therefore the condition named in the second article of the treaty of 1830 and in the 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 43 

patent, that "'they shall live on ihe land,"" is hindinti: individually upon each and 
upon all of the grantees. 

In the third article of the treaty the Choctaws agreed to move all of their people 
within three years, and the United States intended that they should go. But, by the 
fourteenth article of the treaty, provisions were made whereby those who should 
decide to remain and become citizens of the State of Mississippi, in the event that, 
because of the intolerance and persecution of the whites, which they themselves 
had so bitterly experienced, or for any other cause, they might become dissatisfied 
with their altered conditions and their new citizenship and desire to follow them to 
their new homes and thereafter exercise with them in their own country the privi- 
eges of citizenship they could do so, except that they were not to participate with 
them in their annuities, the lands which they were to receive in Mississippi being 
deemed a compensation for that. 

When the fourteenth article of the treaty was framed the negotiating parties under- 
stood that the policy of the LTnited States was that the ('hoctaws were to be removed. 
The Choctaws, in article 3, had just agreed that they shoxdd all go. The ink was 
not yet dry in article 2, whereby the condition was placed in this grant to the lands 
that they should live upon them or they should be forfeited, and that no privilege 
of citizenship could be conferred or enjoyed outside of the territorial jurisdiction 
of their newly accjuired nation. L^nderstanding these conditions, the latter clause 
of article 14 was penned : 

"Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw 
citizen, but if they ever remow — that is, if they ever place themselves on the land 
and within the jurisdiction of the nation whereby those privileges may become opera- 
tive — are not to be entitled to any portion of the Choctaw^ annuity." 

In other words, if they ever remove, they are to enjoy all of the privileges of a 
Choctaw citizen except that of participating in their annuities. If this be not the 
meaning to be attached to the word "remove" as used in the clause of the treaty 
under consideration, it must be meaningless. But in the interpretation of statutes 
it is the duty of the court to so interpret them as to give every word a meaning, and, 
in doing so, it must take into consideration the whole statute, its objects and purposes, 
the rights which are intended to be enforced and the evils intended to be remedied; 
it may go 1o the history of the transaction about which the legislation is had and 
call to its aid all legitimate facts proven or of which the courts will take judicial notice 
in order to find the true meaning of the word as used in the statute. Of course, the same 
rule of interpretation applies to treaties. Ado]iting these rules in the inter])retation 
of article 1 ! of the treaty of 1830, I arrive at the conclusion that the "privilege of a 
Choctaw citizen'" therein reserved to those Choctaws who shall remain, thereby 
separating themselves, it may be forever, from their brethren and their nation, becom- 
ing citizens of another sovereignty and aliens of their own, situated so that it would 
be impossible while in Mississippi to receive or enjoy any of the rights of Choctaw 
citizenship, was the right to renounce his allegiance to the Commonwealth of Missis- 
sippi, move ujxiTi the lands conveyed to him and his ])er]ile, and there, the only 
spot on earth where he could do so, renew his relations with his people and enjoy 
all of the jjrivileges of a Choctaw citi?.en, except to j)articipate in the annuities. 

As an evidence that the Choctaw people themselves took this view of the question, 
attention is called to the fact that their council has passed many acts and resolutions 
inviting these absent Choctaws to move into their country, and on one occasion 
appropriated a considerable sum of money to assist them f)n their journey; and until 
the past two or three years have always promjitly placed those who did return on the 
rolls of citizenship, but never enrolled an absent Choctaw as a citizen. 

On December 24, 1889, Ihe General Council of the (Choctaw Nation passed the 
following resolution: 

"Whereas there are large numbers of Choctaws yet in the States of Mississippi and 
Louisiana who are entitled to the rights and privileges of citizenship in the Choc- 
taw Nation; and 
"Whereas they are denied all riglits of citizenship in said States; and 
"^Miereas they are too poor to immigrate themselves into the ('hoctaw Nation: There- 
fore be it 

''Resolved b)j the General Council of the Choctaw Nation assembled, That the United 
States Government is hereby rerpiested to make provisions for the emigration of said 
Choctaws from said States to the ('hoctaw Nation," eti-. 

The language is not that they are entitled to the rights and privileges of Choctaw 
citizenship in the States namerl, l)ut "who are entitle! to all the rights and privileges 
of citizenship in the Choctaw Nation," and the prayer is that because of the fact that 
they are denied the rights of citizenship in the State.s that the United States will 



44 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

remove them to a place — ^their own country — where the rights of Choctaw citizenship 
may be enjoyed by them. 

As a further evidence of the fact that all of the parties to the treaty, the United 
States, the Choctaw Nation, and the Mississippi Indians themselves, have always 
understood that the Mississippi Choctaws were entitled to none of the rights of a 
Choctaw citizen so long as they remained in that State, attention is called to the fact 
that the lands in Mississippi which were ceded to the United States by the Choctaw 
Nation by virtue of the treaty of 1830 were, under the laws of the United States, 
sold. The Choctaw Nation claimed that they had never been paid any consideration 
for them, and that the United States justly owed them the net proceeds arising out 
of the sale. For many years this contention was carried on before the departments of 
the Government, commissions, and other tribunals. Finally, by treaty, it was sub- 
mitted to the Senate of the United States for decision. That body found in favor of 
the Choctaw Nation. The case then went to the Court of Claims, and from there to 
the United States Supreme Court, in which court judgment was finally rendered for 
nearly |3, 000,000. 

This judgment was rendered in November, 1886. The money was tm-ned over to 
the Choctaws by the United States, and by them, with the knowledge and consent of 
the United States, divided among their own people who lived in the nation. Not one 
farthing of it was ever paid to an absent Mississippi Choctaw, and no portion of it was 
ever claimed by them. During this whole litigation, running through many years, 
no effort was made to make themselves parties to the suit. And when the money was 
finally paid to the Choctaw authorities to be divided among the people they made 
no claim for any part of it, and entered no protest to its Ifeing paid to the resident Choc- 
taws, nor havethey brought suit for their share since. The other party to the treaty, 
the United States Government, the guardian of these Indians, paid the money without 
ever making any provisions for the Mississippi Choctaws to get their share or intimating 
that anything was due them. Wlien it is remembered that this money was the pro- 
ceeds of the sale of the lands in Mississippi belonging to the united Choctaw people 
while they lived in that State, and that the great bulk of the Mississippi Choctaws 
had never received one farthing for their share in the lands. If they, living in Mis- 
sissippi, are entitled there to the rights of a Choctaw citizen it is remarkable that they 
did not assert their rights. 

Again, a few years ago, the interest of the Choctaws to lands lying west of their 
present boundaries was sold by them to the United States for a considerable sum o 
money. This, like the other, was promptly divided among the resident Choctaws 
with the knowledge and consent of the United States, and without protest or claim of 
the ]\Iississippi Choctaws. If they are entitled to the privilege of Choctaw citizens 
without removing into the boundaries of the nation they are and were entitled to their 
pro rata share of this money. If they do not understand that they have no claim to 
the rights of citizenship without moving into the country why have they, for the past 
65 years, silently stood by and permitted these kinds of transactions to be had without 
claim, protests, or suit? 

The Eastern Band of (Jherokees. now residing in North Carolina, sustained a rela- 
tionship to the Cherokee Na,tion almost identical to that sustained by the Mississippi 
Choctaws to the Choctaw Nation. Like the Mississippi Choctaws, there were some 
amoiig them who were averse to movirg to their new countr>% west of the IMississippi 
River. Provisions were made for them by the treaty of New Echota — the treaty of 
1835— between tlie Cherokee Nation and the United States similar to those with the 
Choctaws by the treaty of 1830. When the Cherokee people moved to the present 
home of the ('herokees, these remained behind in North Carolina, where they have 
ever since resided. Like the Choctaw treaty of 1830, the treaty of New Echota pro- 
wled that tlieir lands should be ceded to them and their descendants, and so forth. 
The Cherokee Nation, by virtue of a treaty with the United States, afterwards sold 
some of these lands. 

The Eastern Band of Cherokees, in North Carolina, unlike their Mississippi Choctaw 
brethren, ])romptly demanded their ])r() rata of the proceeds of this sale, and upon 
beiig denied at oiice sought and obtained permission of the United States to sue the 
Cherokee Nation in the Court of Claims for this money, and also, in the same suit, to 
sue for another fund which was created bv the treaty of New Echota, consisting of 
certain annuities in tlie sum of $214,000, "of which the Eastern Band of Cherokees 
claimed a pro rata share. The suit was brought, and the Court of Claims, in a very 
elaborate and learned decision, decided against the right of the Eastern Band of Chero- 
kees to recover, upon the ground that those Cherokees, by the act of remaining in 
North Carolina, had alienated themselves from the Cherokee Nation to such an extent 
that they could not claim any rights of a Cherokee citizen ^\■ithout moving into the 
Cherokee Nation and there being readmitted in accordance with the constitution 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 45 

and laws of that nation. The case was appealed to tlie Supreme ('ourt of the United 
States, and there the decision of the Court of Claims was affirmed. (Eastern Band of 
Cherokees v. U. S., 117 U. S., 288.) In that case the Supreme Court, after reviewing 
all of the treaties and statutes relating to the matter, concluded by saying: 

"If Indians in that State (North Carolina) or any other State east of the Mississippi 
wish to enjoy the benefits of the common property of the Cherokee Nation, in what- 
ever form it may exist, they must, as held by the Court of Claims, comply with the 
constitution and laws of the Cherokee Nation and be readmitted to citizenship as 
there provided. They can not live out of its territory, evade the obligations and 
burdens of citizenship, and at the same time enjoy the benefits of the funds and 
common property of the nation. These funds and that property were dedicated by 
the constitution of the Cherokees and were intended by the treaties with the Ignited 
States for the benefit of the united nation, and not in any respect for those who had 
separated from it and become aliens to their nation. We can see no just ground on 
which the claim of the petitioners can rest in either of the funds held by the United 
States in trust for the Cherokee Nation." 

It seems to me that this decision of the Supreme Court, founded on a case so nearly 
similar to the one at hearing, conclusively settles the contention in favor of the Choc- 
taw Nation. Indeed, in tliat case the Supreme Court expresses a very strong intima- 
tion that those provisions of the treaty of New Echota relating to and providing for 
these Cherokees who should refuse to move West ^\ere confined in their operation to 
that class of Cherokees then in esse, and the rights conferred by those provisions of 
the treaty did not descend to Iheir offspring; that the descendants of those Cherokees 
did not succeed to the rights of their ancestors under the treaty. The language of the 
Supreme Court is : 

"Nor is the band (Eastern Band of Cherokees), organized as it now is, the successor 
of any organization recognized by any treaty or law of the United States. Individual 
Indians who refused to remove West and preferred to remain and become citizens of 
the States in which they resided were promised certain moneys, but there is no evi- 
dence that the petitioners have succeeded to any of these rights. The original claim- 
ants have probably all died, for 50 years have elapsed since the treaty of 1835 was 
made, and no transfer from them to their legal representatives is shown." (lb., 310.) 

The court proceeds, however, to decide this case, as heretofore shown, on the ground 
that the Indians composing the Eastern Band of Cherokees had not removed into the 
Cherokee Nation and reassumed their citizenship under the constitution and laws of 
that nation. 

I am disposed to the opinion, however, and will so hold, that the descendants of the 
Mississippi Choctaws, by virtue of the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830, are en- 
titled to all of the rights of Choctaw citizenship, with all of the privileges and property 
rights incident thereto, provided they have renounced their allegiance to the sover- 
eignty of Mississippi by moving into the Choctaw Nation in good faith to live upon 
their lands, renewing their allegiance to that nation, and putting themselves in an 
attitude whereby the)^ will be able to share in the burdens of their government. The 
reason for this conclusion is, to my mind, made morally certain when it is remembered 
that ever since the treaty of 1830, now for the period of nearly 67 years, with the excep- 
tion of the past 2 or 3 years, the Choctaw Nation, by its legislative enactments, and by 
its acts so long continued that by custom they have become crystallized into law, 
have universally admitted all who should remove to this country and rehabilitate 
them in all of the rights and privileges of citizenship enjoyed by themselves. 

The counsel for the claimants lay considerable stress on the effect of the provisions 
of article 13 of the treaty of 1866 between the United States and the Choctaw Nation. 
(14 Stat., — .) 

By the eleventh and twelfth articles of that treaty a scheme was devised by which 
the lands of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations were to be surveyed and divided and 
allotted to the individual Indians, provided the councils of the respective nations 
should agree to it, which, however, they have refused to do. A land office was to be 
established at Boggy Depot in the Choctaw Nation. When all of the surveys were 
completed, maps thereof were to be filed in the said land oHice, subject to the inspec- 
tion of all parties interested, and immediately thereafter notice of such filing was to 
be giyen for 90 days, calling upon all parties interested to examine said ma])s, to the 
end that errors in the location of occupancies, which were to be noted on the map, 
might be corrected. 

Then followed article 13 of the treaty, which is as follows: 

"Art. 13. The notice required in the above article shall be given not only in the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, but by publication in the newspapers printed in 
the States of Mississippi and Tennessee, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and Alabama, 
to the end that sucli Choctaws and Cliickasaws as yet remain outside of the Choctaw 



46 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

and Chickasaw Nations may be informed and have opportunity to exercise the rights 
hereby given to resident Choctaws and Cliickasaws: I'rovided, That before any such 
absent Clioctaw or Chickasaw shall be perniittetl to select for him or herself or other, 
as hereinafter provided, he or shesiiall satisfy the register of the land oflice of his or her 
intention, or the intention of the party for whom the selection is to be made, to become 
bona fide resident in the said nation within five years from the time of selection and 
should the said absentee fail to remove into said nation and occupy and commence 
an improvement on the land selected within the time aforesaid the said selection 
shall be canceled and the land shall thereafter be discharged from all claim on account 
thereof." 

From an examination of this article of the treaty it will be seen that the Choctaws 
and Cliickasaws recognized the right of absent members of their nations to participate 
in the allotment and subsequent ownership of their lands to the same extent as they 
themselves enjoyed, but on conditions, however; First, that they should satisfy the 
register of the land office of their intention to become bona fide residents in the said 
nation within five years from the time of said selection; and, second, that within the 
said five years they should actually remove into the said nation (there is a statute 
of limitation); and, third, that within the said five years they should occupy and com- 
mence an improvement upon the selected lands. 

It will be observed that this latter clause imposes a condition on absent Indians 
nowhere required of the resident ones by any clause of the treaty. They were required 
to move into the t'ountry and show their good faith and their intention to remain bona 
fide citizens of the nation by actual occupancy of the land and an expenditure of 
money in its imjirovement. The notice was to be given them in order that they 
might have an op])ortunity of removing into the nation and there residing and resum- 
ing their rights as citizens; but care was to be taken, and safeguards provided by which 
their removal was to be actually had, and that was to be done in good faith. First, 
the register of the land office was to be convinced by such proof as might satisfy him 
of the intention of the absent Indian to become a bona fide resident of the nation 
before he was allowed to make a selection; and, second, that was to be followed by an 
actual occupancy and improvement of the land; and if he failed in this, it worked a 
forfeiture of his rights. Nowhere within the whole treaty is any right recognized or con- 
ferred on an absent Indian except consummated or enjoyed until after actual removal. 
No treaty or act of the Choctaw Council or of any officer of the Choctaw Nation since 
the treaty of 1830 can be cited, or at least I have not found them, whereby any right 
or pri^dlege has been conferred, granted, or recognized in or to a Mississippi Choctaw 
80 long as he shall remain away from his people, but there are an infinitude of such 
acts and conduct granting and recognizing such rights and privileges to him after he 
shall have moved away. 

The provisions of the treaty of 1866, so far from being an authority in favor of the 
contention of claimants, seems to me to be strongly against him. 

To permit men with, perchance, but a strain of Choctaw blood in their veins, who 
65 years ago broke away from their kindred and their nation, and during that time, 
or the most of it, have been exercising the rights of citizenship and doing homage to 
the sovereignty of another nation, who have borne none of the burdens of this nation, 
and have become strangers to the people, to reach forth their hands from their distant 
and alien home and lay hold of a part of the public domain, the common property of 
the people, and a])proi)riate it to their own use would be unjust and inequitable. 

It is, therefore, the opinion of the court that absent Mississippi Choctaws are not 
entitled to be enrolled as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. 

The action of the Dawes Commission is therefore affirmed, and a decree will be 
entered for the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Norton. That is the gist of Mr. Harrison's case. 

Mr. Ferris. Exactly his contention now. Now let us see what the 
"Federal court says: This is not a case out of point, but is simply a 
decision of the exact issue now before this committee where the facts 
are identical. 

Mr. Hastings. You want to make that clear, that that exact ques- 
tion was raised in the Jack Amos case. 

Mr. Ferris. Yes; Jack Amos and 97 full-blood Choctaws, then 
residing in Mississippi, were carried over by some attorneys to Okla- 
homa and came before the Dawes Commission and said: 

Under the fourteenth article of the treaty we are entitled to be enrolled; we are 
entitled to share in this land; we are entitled to share in tliis money and still keep 
our residence in Mississippi. 



INDIAN APPROPKIATION BILL, 191*7. 47 

This is the winding up clause of Judge Clayton's decision. 

The Chairman, What is the date of that decision ? 

^Ir. Ferris. 1896, I think— no, 1897. They came before the 
Dawes Commission in 1896 and were turned down flat. This was on 
appeal to Federal court from the Dawes Commission, who had already 
held they could not be enrolled under Article XIV of the treaty. 

But listen to what the court says. The whole case will be settled 
in your mind once and for all. 

Mr. Thompson, This was on appeal from the Dawes Commission ? 

Mr. Ferris, Yes; it was first tried before the Dawes Commission, 
and they turned it down liat. It was preposterous to assume that 
those people could live in Mississippi and retain the allegiance of their 
people nearly 100 years, and then decide to go to Oklahoma and get 
then" land and still remain in Mississippi. To do that would let them 
profit by the refusal to do what Congress intended them to do ; yes, to 
profit by refusing to do the things they agreed to do. 

Congress called upon the Dawes Commission in 1897 for a report on 
this very subject. The commission's report is a Senate document 
which I am inserting herewith. It is as follows : 

[House Document No. 271, Fifty-fifth Congress, second session.] 

Report of the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes. 

[Letter from the Secretarj^ of the Interior, transmittme; a report of the Commission to the Five Civilized 
Tribes relative to the Mississippi Choetaws.] 

Department of the Interior, 

Washington, February 2, 1898. 
Sir: I have the honor to transmit herewith a copy of a report of the Commission 
to the Five Civilized Tribes, relative to the Mississippi Choetaws, made in pursuance 
of the folloAving provision contained in the Indian appropriation act of June 7, 1897: 
"That the commission appointed to negotiate wttli the Five Civilized Tribes in 
the Indian Territory shall examine and report to Congress whether the Mississippi 
Choetaws under their treaties are not entitled to all the rights of Choctaw citizen- 
shin, except an interest in the Choctaw annuities." 
Very respectfully, 

C. N. Bt.iss, Secretary. 
The Speaker of the House op Representatives. 



report of the commission to the five civiuzEi^ tribes upon the question 

"whether the MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAWS UNDER THEIR TREATIES ARE NOT ENTITLED 
TO ALL THE RIGHTS OF CHOCTAW CITIZENSHIP, EXCEPT AN INTEREST IN THE CHOCTAW 
ANNUITIES," REQUIRED BY ACT OF CONGRESS, APPROVED JUNE 7, 1897. 

To the Congress of the United Stales: 

The Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes were required by act approved June 
7, 1897, to "Examine and report to Congress whether the Mississippi Choetaws under 
their treaties are not entitled to all the rights of Choctaw citizenship, except an interest 
in the Choctaw annuities." 
The commission has attended to that duty, and make the foUow^ing rej^ort: 
The Mississippi Choetaws are the descendants of those Choctaw Indians who declined 
to remove to the Indian Territory with the tribe under the provisions of the treaty 
made with the United States September 27. 1830, under which the Choetaws obtained 
their present reservation in the Indian Territory. There has never been a census 
taken of them, but they are estimated to number at the present time about twelve 
hundred. These are represented to be a poor and feeble band, somewhat scattered 
in different parts of the State of Mississippi, but located mostly in the counties of Nes- 
hoba, Newton. Leake, Scott, and Winston. They claim the right to continue their 
residence and political status in Missi.ssiiJjji as they and those from whom they 
descended have done for 65 years, and still are entitled to enjoy all the rights of 



48 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

Choctaw citizenship except to share in the Choctaw annuities. This claim is based 
on the fourteenth article of said treaty, which is in these words: 

"Article XIV. Each Choctaw head of a family being desirous to rernain and 
become a citizen of the States shall be permitted to do so, by signifyino; his intention 
to the agent within six months from the ratification of this treaty, and he or she shall 
thereupon be entitled to a reservation of one section of six hundred and forty acres 
of land, to be bounded by sectional lines of surv^ey; in like manner shall be entitled 
to one-half that quantity for each unmarried child which is living with liim over ten 
years of age; and a quarter section to such child as may be under ten years of age, 
to adjoin "the location of the parent. If they reside upon said lands intending to 
become citizens of States for five years after the ratification of this treaty, in that 
case a grant in fee simple shall issue; said reservation shall include the present 
improvement of the head of the family, or a portion of it. Persons who claim under 
this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw citizen, but if they ever remove 
are not entitled to any portion of the Choctaw annuity." 

What their political status is in the State of Mississiptpi is defined in this fourteenth 
article of the treaty. Their ancestors each was to signify within six months after the 
ratification of the treaty his desire to remain and become a citizen of the States, 
which would entitle them to 640 acres of land and a less amount to each member of 
his family, and after a residence on the same of five years, with intent to become a 
citizen, are then entitled to a patent in fee, and are thereby made citizens of the 
States. Their ancestors having done this, they claim, under the concluding clause 
of said article, that their ancestors could and they now can continue such citizenship 
and residence in Mis8issippi and be still entitled to all the rights of a Choctaw citizen 
in the tribal property of said nation in the Indian Territory, except their annuities. 
This clause upon which the claim rests is in these words: 

"Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw citi- 
zen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any portion of the Choctaw annu- 
ity- " 

But this construction is in direct conflict with the very purpose for which the treaty 
was made, and \vith the nature of the title to the lands in the territory secured to the 
Choctaws by it, and to the whole structure and administration of tlieir government 
ever since under it. 

No fact is better established than this, that the leading motive, if not the only one, 
on the part of the United States, was to get the Choctaws out of Mississippi and into 
what is now the Indian Territory. They accordingly pro\-ided in the second article 
of the treaty, among other things, that the Choctaws should live on the land ceded to 
them by it in the Indian Territory. That article is in these words: 

"Article 2. 'i he United States under a grant specially to be made by the President 
of the Unifed States shall cause to be conveyed to the Choctaw Nation a tract of 
country west of the Mississippi River, in fee simple, to them and their descendants, 
to inure to them while they shall exist as a nation and live on it (here follows a des- 
cription of the land). The grant to be executed as soon as the present treaty shall be 
ratified." 

And the Choctaws agree in the third article to remove all their people to this terri- 
tory during the years 18ol, 1832. and 18;^3. 

Now, to construe the concluding clause of the fourteenth article to mean an offer 
to those who refuse to go with their brethren to the new territory an equal share in 
the new lands with those who go and the additional fee simple of 640 acres of land 
in Mississippi and ( itizenship if they do not go is to offer a bounty to those who refuse 
to go, and would defeat the very purpose of the treaty. Not one would have gone 
when offered s) mu h better terms f )r staying. It is well known that the Choctaws 
were very reluctant to enter into this treaty at all, because a portion of them — the 
ancestors of these claimants — refused to leave with the main body, and the treaty 
was not exer-uted till the provisions of the fourteenth article were made for those 
unwilling to leave with their brethren. But the United States did not cease its orig- 
in-al purp )se to se lire the removal of them all to the new country, even those pro- 
vided for in the fourteenth article. Thev, therefore, inserted the concluding clause 
to that arti< le to the effect of a continuing offer and pledge, that if they did ever 
"remove" — that is, if thev ever changed their minds and concluded to remove — the 
fact that they had been freeholders and citizens of Mississippi should not bar them 
out of Choctaw citizenship, Init that they should share like all the rest in everything 
but the annuities. Thus construed the clause is a standing inducement to those 
Indians to remove in accordance with the purpose of the treaty instead of a standing 
bounty to remain and thus thwart that purpose. 



IXDIAX APPKOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 49 

In addition to the condition which entered into the title that the grantees must 
"live on it" or lose it, the nature of the title was sir h that these claimants could 
derive no benefit from it without livinG: on it, and by remaining in Mississippi it 
would be worthless to them. It is a territory in common, and has l^een held as such 
from that day, 1830, till now. Now, no tenant in common, who voluntarily leaves 
the common property to the occupancy of his cotenants, can ever claim of them any 
of the fruits of its use. So that these Mississippi Choctaws, if they are cotenants with 
the resident Choctaws in these lan-^s in the Indian Territory, must first go there and 
occupy them with their cotenants or forego any use of them. 

Another condition cf this title is that the <Tantees shall not only "live upon it," 
but if the Choctaw Nation ceases to exist the title is l^st. If all the Choctaws should 
follow the example of these Mississippi Choctaws and remain residents and citizens 
of Mississippi, it would ipso facto cease to exist as a nation and the title be lost. It is 
impossible to conceive that the Chocta^V Nation itself, as well as the United States, 
entered into this fourteenth article with any intention of enabling them so to do. 

As further evidence that both parties to tliis treaty understood that they had created 
a title to be held in common by the meml^ers of the tribe alone, in which no onenot 
a member could have any interest, the United States and the Choctaws entered into 
a treaty in 1855 in respect to the title to those lands (U. S. Stats., 11, p. 612), the first 
article of which is in these words: 

"Article 1. And pursuant to an act of Congress approved ]\Iay 28. 1830, the United 
States do hereby forever secure and guarantee the lands embraced within the said 
limits to the members of the Choctaw and Chickasaw tribes, their heirs and succes- 
sors, to be held in common, so that each and every member of either tribe shall have 
an equal, undivided interest in the whole: Provided, however, No part thereof shall 
ever be sold without the consent of both tribes, and that said lands- shall revert to 
the United States if said Indians and their heirs become extinct or abandon the same." 

Although it is true that any vested right of the Mississippi Choctaws in this land 
could not; be affected by any treaty to which they were not a party, attentiim is called 
to this article for the double purpose of showdng that both the United States and the 
Choctaw Nation have from the beginning held that the title has always been in the 
members of the tribe alone, and is now so fixed that no one else but members can 
share in it. The treaty uses the same language in the outset as is used in the treaty 
of 1830, containing the fom'teenth article, on which the present claim rests. It says 
like that treaty, that it is entered into "pursuant to an act of Congress approved May 
28, 1830," and then declares that "the United States do hereby forever secure and 
guarantee the lands embraced within the said limits to the members of the Choctaw 
and Cliickasaw Tribes, their heirs and successors, to be held in common, so that each 
and every member of either tribe shall have an equal, undivided interest in the whole: 
Provided, however, No part thereof shall ever be sold without the consent of both tribes, 
and that said land shall revert to the United States if said Indians and their heirs 
become extinct or abandon the same." 

There can be no longer doubt that the present title is in the members of the tribes 
alone, and that the United States has pledged itself to so maintain it, and that it so 
does in the belief of both parties to the treaty that such was the title from the begin- 
ning. No man can, therefore, as the title now stands, have any interest in these 
lands unless he is a member in one of these tribes. 

Now, it has been a law of tbe Choctaw Nation from the beginning of its existence, 
recognized by the Supreme Court and by Congress, that no man can be a citizen of 
that nation who does not reside in it and assume the obligations of such citizenship 
before he can enjoy its privileges. To "enjoy the privileges of a Choctaw citizen" 
one must be a Choctaw citizen. 

If this land should be ultimately allotted, any allotment to other than a citizen 
would come in direct conflict not only with the terms of the treaty title but to the 
whole system of the Choctaw government from the beginning. By the treaty, the 
allottee must be a member of either tlie Choctaw or ('hlckasaw tribes. He can, being 
a stranger, neither occu])y nnr soil liis allotment, for l)y the treaty all strangers are 
to b(i kept out of the territory, and the land is to be sold to no one except with the 
consent of both tribes. 

This historical review of the ac(|uisition of this Territory by the Choctaw Nation, 
and its subsetjuent legal relations to it, makes it clear, in the ojnnion of this commis- 
sion, that the Mis.si.ssippi Choctaws are not, under their treatie.-j, entitled to "all the 
rights of Choctaw citizenship except an interest in the Choctaw annuities," and still 
continue their residence and citizenship in the State of Mississippi. 

What, then, are "the pri\ileges of a Choctaw citizen," secured to them by the 
fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830? That article, after having secured to those 

25134— PT 4—16 4 



50 INDIAN" APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

unwilling to remove with their brethren to the Indian Territory 640 acres of land and 
enrollment and citizenship in the State of Mississippi, added this further clause: 

"Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privileges of a Choctaw 
citizen, but if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any portion of the Choctaw 
annuity." 

The commission are of the opinion that this clause was intended to offer a further 
inducement to those Indians to follow at some future time their brethren and jointhem 
in their new home, and that the true construction of it is that the door of admission 
shall be kept open to them, and if they ever remove this stay and citizenship in Mis- 
sissippi shall not bar them out, but that, notwithstanding it, they shall be admitted 
to all the privileges of Choctaw citizenship equally with all others, save only a share 
in their annuity. This construction finds further corroboration in the treaty of 1866 
(14th Statutes at Large) between the United States and the Choctaws and Chickasaws 
concerning the title to this same territory.' In this treaty, for the first time, the 
possibility of an allotment of these lands in severalty to tlae members of the tribes 
at some time in the future was recognized. It was, therefore, provided in this treaty 
that whenever the tribes desired it such allotment among their members should take 
place, and at great detail the manner in which it was to be done was set forth. The 
treaty then provided that before it did take place notice should be given "not only 
in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, but by publication in newspapers printed 
in the States of Mississippi and Tennessee, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, and Alabama, 
to the end that such Choctaws and Chickasaws as yet remain outside of the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations may be informed and have opportunity to exercise the rights 
hereby given to resident Choctaws and Chickasaws: Provided, That before any such 
absent Choctaw or Chickasaw shall be permitted to select for him or herself, or others, 
as hereinafter provided, he or she shall satisfy the register of the land office of his or 
her intention, or the intentioii of the party for whom the selection is to be made, to 
become bona fide resident in the said nation within five years from the time of selection; 
and should the said absentee fail to remove into said nation, and occupy and com- 
mence an improvement on the land selected within the time aforesaid, the said selec- 
tion shall be canceled, and the land shall thereafter be discharged from all claim on 
account thereof." 

There can be no doubt that this provision was inserted for the special benefit of 
those claiming to enjoy the rights of a Choctaw citizen under this fourteenth article 
of the treaty of 1830, many of those Choctaws ha\'ing wandered away from Mississippi 
into the other States mentioned. It was a notice to them that these lands were about 
to be allotted to members of the tribes, and if they desired to avail themselves of a 
share in the allotment they must make themselves such members by coming from 
"outside" and Join their brethren in the common citizenship of the nation. 

The terms upon which each applicant can avail himself of this opportunity are 
clear and unequivocal. He must satisfy the register of his intenticai to become a 
bona fide resident in the Territory within five years of the date of his application 
before he can select his allotment, and a failure to remove into said nation and to 
occupy and commence improvement on the land so occupied within the time speci- 
fied forfeits altogether the selection. 

This proviso needs no explanation. The United States and the Choctaws have 
affixed it to the title, and those claiming the benefit of the 14th article must conform 
to it or lose their rights. 

It follows, therefore, from this reasoning, as well as from the historical review 
already cited, and the nature of the title itself, as well as all stipulations concerning 
it in the treaties between the United States and the Choctaw Nation, that to avail 
himself of the "privileges of a Choctaw citizen " any person claiming to l)e a descend- 
ant of those Choctaws who were provided for in the fourteenth article of the treaty of 
1830 must first show the fact that he is such descendant and has, in good faith, joined 
his brethren in the Territory with the intent to become one of the citizens of the 
nation. Having done so, such person has a right to be enrolled as a Choctaw citizen 
and to claim all the privileges of such a citizen, except to a share in the annuities, 
and that otherwise he can not claim as a right the "priA-ilege of a Choctaw citizen." 

To the claim as thus defined the Choctaw Nation has always acceded and has 
manifested in many ways its willingness to take into its citizenship any one or all 
of the Afississippi Choctaws who would leave their residence and citizenship in that 
State and join in good faith their brethren in the Territory, with participation in all 
the privileges of such citizenship, save only a share in their annuities, for which an 
equivalent has been given in the grant of land and citizenship in Mississippi. 

The national council, in view of the poverty and inability of these Choctaws to 
remove at their own expense to the Territory, memorialized Congress on December 



INDIAN APl'KOrKIATlON I'll I., i;;li. 51 

9, 1889, to make provision for their remoA'al, l)y the adoption of tlic following reso- 
lution ; 

Whereas there are large numbers of Choctaws yet in the States of Mississippi and 
Louisiana who are entitled to all the rights and privileges of citizenship in the 
Choctaw Nation; and 
Whereas they are denied all rights of citizenship in said States; and 
Whereas they are too poor to immigrate themselA-es into the Choctaw Nation: There- 
fore, 

"Be it resolved h/ the General Council of the Choctaw Nation assembled, That the 
United States Government is hereby requested to make provision for the emigration 
of said Choctaws from said States to the Choctaw Nation, etc." 

It is a significant fact that this claim on the part of the Mississippi Choctaws to all 
the privileges of a citizen in the Choctaw Nation, and still retain their residence and 
citizenship in the State of Mississippi, is a very recent one. There is no e\adence 
known to the commission that tlie early Mississippi Choctaws ever made such a claim. 
In later years the Choctaws and Chickasaws have sold at different times large por- 
tions of their territory to the United States, and the proceeds, amounting in the aggre- 
gate to several millions of dollars, haxe been distributed per capita among the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw citizens. If this claim as now presented is the correct one, these 
Mississippi Choctaws were entitled to their per capita share in all the money equally 
with all other citizens of the nation, yet not a dollar of it was eA'er paid to them or 
claimed by them. 

This claim to participate in the privileges of a Choctaw citizen and still retain a 
residence and citizenship in Mississippi has recently come before the United States 
court, in the third district in the Indian Territory, in the case of Jack Amos et al. v. 
The Choctaw Nation, No. 158 on the docket of that court. The case was an appeal 
of Mississippi Choctaws from a refusal of this commission to place them on the rolls 
of Choctaw citizenship. The court. Judge Wm. H. H. Clayton, overruled the appeal 
and confirmed the judgment of this commission, denying such enrollment, in a very 
elaborate and exhaustive opinion. 

If, in accordance with this conclusion of the commission, these Mississippi Choc- 
taws have the right at any time to remove to the Indian Territory and, joining their 
brethren there, claim participation in all the priA-ileges of a Choctaw citizen, save 
participation in their annuities, still, if any person presents himself claiming this 
right, he must be required by some tribunal to proA'e the fact that lie is a descendant 
of some one of those Indians who originally availed themselves of and conformed to 
the requirements of the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830. The time for making 
application to this commission to be enrolled as a Choctaw citizen has expired. It 
would be necessary, therefore, to extend by law the time for persons claiming this 
right to make application and be heard by this commission or to create a new tribunal 
for that purpose. 

In conclu.sion, it seems to the commission that the importance of a correct decision 
of this question, both to the Mississippi Choctaws and the Choctaw Nation, justifies 
a provision for a judicial decision in a case provided for that purpose. They there- 
fore suggest that, in proper form, jurisdiction may be given the Coiirt of Claims to 
pass judicially upon tMs (juestion in a suit brought for that purpose by either of the 
interested parlies. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Henry L. Dawes, 
Tams Bixby, 
Frank C. Armstrong, 
A. S. McKennon, 

Commissioners. 
Washington, D. C, January 28, 1898. 

Now, I wish you gentlemen would take time to read this opinion. 
It is an opinion by three great lawyers appointed by the President 
pursuant to an act of Congress specilically empowering them to deal 
with this and similar cases. They did deal with them. The facts 
are identical with the present contention. It decides once and for 
all this proposition. It goes on and says how unreasonable it is in 
the face of the treaty, in the face of the acts of Congress, in tlie face 
of relations had between them and the Federal Government, that they 
would be permitted to remain in Mississi})pi and still share in the 
Oklahoma estate. They had had their lands; they had had their 



52 IXDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1911. 

money; thoy had had their land scrip, their opportunity, and their 
patrimony, and now, almost 100 years later, after all the old Indians 
who entered into the treaty have died, the attorneys marshal these 
men forward and again they seek to lay claim to property in Okla- 
homa Ixdonging to the Oklahoma Indians, and endeavor to carry it 
back to Mississippi. To do that, Mr. Chairman, would be to attack 
a man who has had a deed to his land for a hundred years by some 
one who had refused to go West and taki; his homestead, who should 
say at this late day, "I come on now and claim my share of this prop- 
erty, even though I have not shared in the burdens of its acc{uirement. 
To allow those descendants who are perchance but a strain of Indian 
blood to now reach their hand into the Oklalioma tribal funds would 
do violence to justice, to law, and every decision on the subject. 

These people have patents to their lands. We do not have to 
stand alone on the Federal court decisions. We do not have to rely 
on the decision of the Dawes Commission. We can rely on a solemn 
patent issued by this Government to the Oklahoma Choctaws. It 
was issued under President Tyler March 3, 1842, Listen to what it 
says: 

That the United States of America, in consideration of the premises, and in execu- 
tion of the af^Toemcnt and slipuUxtiou in the aforesaid treaty, have given and granted, 
and hy these presents do give and grant unto the said ( 'hoctaw Nation the aforesaid 
''tract of country west of the Mississippi"; to have and to hold the same, with all the 
rights, privileges, immunities, and ap])urtenances of whatsoever nature thereunto 
bolongiiig, as intended "to be conveyed" by the aforesaid article, "in fee simple to 
them and their descendants, to inure to them, while they shall exist as a nation and 
live on it" liable to no transfer or alienations except to the United States or with their 
I'lUsent. 

You see, gentlemen of the committee, Congress patents it to 
them, but they say they must live on it. The very initial instru- 
ment of the conveyance, the patent itself, says they must live on it. 
They must remain on it. And here my genial friend from Missis- 
sippi, Mr. Harrison, even in the face of that, even in the face of the 
decision of the Federal court, even in the face of four or five acts of 
Congress, even in the face of three or four treaties, even in the face 
of the decisions of four Secretaries of the Interior and four Indian 
Commissioners, woidd have this committee now do things that no 
one now recommends, that no department stands behind or for, 
that no one has ever stood for or ever recommended favorably. 

Mr. Harrison. Do you contend that under the treaty of 1820 
the Choctaw Nation did not acquire those lands in Oklahoma? 

Mr. Ferris. Undoubtedly they did. 

Mr. Harrison. That was issued in 1840? 

Mr. Ferris. No; only the patent was issued to them under 
President Tyler in 1842. I am right about that. The gentleman 
will have a chance to reply. 

Mr. CxVRTER. Did not the treaty provide the same thing? 

Mr. Ferris. Undoubtedly. In the strongest terms. Every treaty, 
every decision, every act in connection with tliis matter has borne 
out the idea that tliey must live on it. 

Mr. Norton. Will you permit Mr. Harrison to state riglit there, 
briefly, what he ccmtends are the decisions that hold that the Missis- 
sippi Choctaws are entitled to this property, just so we can get it 
all together — that entitles the Mississippi Choctaws in Mississippi to 
remain there and have a right to this tribal property in Oklahoma ? 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 11)17. 53 

Ml'. Harrison. I think the ox parte opinion of Judge Towiisend 
is one. That was 1896. I think the Cherokee trust fund case, (202 
U. S. Reports), woukl su})stantiate our reasonin";; and I think that 
after the Chiyton decision that Ferris calls attention to and the Dawes 
Commission opinion in 1896, after they had decickvl what he con- 
tends they (kn-ided — and which I admit — that the Congress of the 
United States thought it was a just opinion or they never wouhl have 
written those acts after that, sending McKinnon down there to make 
those rolls. There are 1,100 on those rolls now who are not on the 
tribal rolls. 

]VIr. Norton. Are there any other decisions? 

Mr. Harrison. No; those are the two decisions that I rely on, and 
I think the Clayton decision is not of a respectable authority for a 
great question like this to be determined by. 

Mr. Norton. You admit that Congress passed an act in 1896 re- 
questing the Dawes Commission to investigate this particular ques- 
tion, and that the Dawes Commission under that act of Congress 
reported adversely ? 

Mr. Harrison. No, I do not admit that. I think that under the 
act giving the Dawes Commission authority, they were to go to 
Oklahoma and make up the rolls of the Choctaws in Oklahoma, and 
then when these applications from Jack Amos and these others were 
presented to the Dawes Commission they held they had no authority 
under the act of Congress to enroll Mississippi Choctaws; and in their 
opinion their reasoning was stated by Mr. Ferris. 

Mr. Norton. In their opinion those Choctaws liad no rights? 

Mr. Harrison. Yes; and afterwards in their report of 1897 or 1898 
they stated to the Congress of the United States that "in our opin- 
ion this matter is such a complicated one that a court of competent 
jurisdiction ought to decide the merits of it." 

Mr. Ferris. Mr. Chairman, of course it is a well-known fact that 
judge Townsend's so-called decision was a thing that he hastily over- 
ruled himself in, and I {)rcsume all of you know that. Also, -he Avas 
a judge for a foreign people to the Choctaws, under another tribe 
entirely. But anyway, he did not stick by his decision. It was for 
another tribe and not an analogous case at all. iilso in the Cherokee 
case that was for another tribe, and the fourteenth-article claimants 
were not in issue at all. The cases are not in point anyway and do 
not bear out the contention of Mr. Harrison. 

Now, one word as to whether or not Judge Clayton was a reputable 
judge. Judge Clayton was a regularly appointed Federal judge. 
He was apponited by the Pi-esident of" the United States, just tlie 
same as any other judge. Judge CUayton was so reputable that 
Congress conferred upon him in addition to his general jurisdiction 
as a Federal judge the right to pass finally u])()n these enrollment 
cases. 

Now, they sought to appeal after Judge C'layton held against 
them. They appealed to the Supreme Court of the Ihiited States, 
and the Supreme Court of the United States on motion of the appel- 
lants dismissed their own case, and the attorneys to the Mississippi 
Choctaws came into the Supreme Court of the I'nited States and 
dismissed their own case, deciding evidently to abide by the decision 
of Judge Clayton. (Sec. 190 U. S. lieports, at p. 190. )* 



54 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1017. 

Mr. Dill. Is this Judge Clayton the same Clayton that was a 
Congressman here ? 

Mr. Ferris. No; that is another Federal judge. 

Mr. Carter. He is a brother. 

Mr. Tillman. No; he is no relation at all. He is a brother to 
Powell Clayton of our State. 

Mr. Ferris. I repeat, the contention of these claimants was first 
overthrown by the decir^ion of the Dawes Commission, second by the 
decision of the Federal court, and then by the Congress of the United 
States, when by the act of April 26, 1906, they formally closed the 
rolls, and then by four Secretaries of the Interior and four Indian 
Commissioners of both political parties, and three Presidents of the 
United States. Every one of whom refused to reopen these cases 
or to in any way agree with their contention. They have been 
passed on again and again and it seems the peaceful Choctaws who 
never raised a tomahawk against this Government will never have 
his peace, as kmg as he has a penny left. 

Now let us get at the matter why this commotion keeps up, with- 
out any disrespect to my friends from Mississippi — I know they are 
moving in an honest cause as they see it, V>ut I am so sure they are 
woefully mistaken. I am so sure the results would not be pleasing 
even to Mississippi to see transpire what would transpire if they were 
ever enrolled. 

I hold in my hand photographs of four convict=5, all negroes, who 
are the star witnesses in this enrollment propaganda, and I will teU 
you a number of things they have done. They are all convicts but 
one [exhibiting photographs to members of the committee]. 

The Chairman. Why are they numbered, Mr. Ferris ? 

Mr. Ferris. That is the number in the penitentiary. These men 
this summer appeared as witnesses, and they appeared for the same 
attorneys who had been continually advocatmg this enrollment legis- 
lation, tlie principal promoter of whom is Webster Ballinger, an attor- 
ney of this city. Webster Ballinger formed a partnership this summer 
with two attorneys by the name of Lindly and Rodkey, the firm name 
being Ballinger, Lindley & Rodkey, and set up shop and opened offices 
in a building where the Commissioners to the Five Civilized Tribes 
held their offices in Muskogee, Okla. They served 44 petitions to 
come and cross-examine on enrollment cases that they claimed were 
entitled to be on the roll. In 33 out of the 44 cases he has, Alec Nail, 
one of these parties that I showed you the picture of, appeared as a 
witness. This man, a full-blood negro, 72 years old, can neither read 
nor write, and who in each case completely impeached himself. In 
20 of the 44 cases Webster Burton, who is in the penitentiary, ap- 
peared, and W. M. James — his name and record number are all near. 
Ilis penitentiary number is 6087, Oklahoma State penitentiar}^. He 
appeared four times out of 44. And I hope that I can have time to 
go over this with some of you to show you how the Oklahoma Indians 
have been harassed for years by these attorneys. I know we have to 
come before Congress often on Oklahoma matters. We have almost 
half of the Indians m the United States in Oklahoma, and no doubt 
the Oklahoma delegation appears burdensome to this committee and 
to Congress, but somewhere, some time, this committee of Congress 
shall know what is going on behind the scenes and why it is they in 
one form or another are trying to put these men on the rolls. [These 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 55 

unprofessional attorneys go down to Oklahoma and ^Mississippi and 
they find stock witnesses, ignorant negroes, four convicts who have 
been used 33 times out of 44 cases as a witness to identify men who 
they claim should go on the rolls. 

Mr. Norton. I ask that that be put in the record. 

]Mr. Ferris. I will do that with a great deal of pleasure. 

Mr. Norton. Now, you sa37^ those men were used as witnesses ? 

Mr. Ferris. Yes; this summer. 

Mr. Norton. In Mississippi? 

Mr. Ferris. In Oklahoma; right in Muskogee. But they are work- 
ing the same thing in Mississippi and on a much broader scale. Their 
activities down there are the subject of a Government report also. I 
will also put that in the record. 

It is as follows : 

Confidential Report. 

[Subject: Operations of Ballinger, Lindly & Rodkey in preparation of enrollment cases.] 

December 27, 1915. 
Hon. Gabe E. Parker, 

Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes, Muskogee, OJcla. 

Dear Mr. Parker: In August last, in accordance with instructions from you to 
assist the Choctaw national attorney, Hon. P. J. Hurley, I entered into an investiga- 
tion, under his direction, of a number of petitions for the enrollment of certain persons 
as citizens of the Choctaw Nation, these petitions having been presented by Mr. 
Webster Ballinger, an attorney of Washington, D. C, to the department and trans- 
mitted to Mr. Hurley for investigation. Since that time, however, I have been un- 
able to devote more than six or eight weeks' time altogether upon this work on account 
of other official duties in connection with your office. 

My information is that the department accepted copies of these petitions as mem- 
oranda of an advisory nature. Mr. Ballinger having indicated that he intends to 
present such petitions to Congress for the purpose of securing the enactment of legis- 
lation placing the names of such petitioners upon the rolls of the respective tribes in 
which they claim the right of citizenship, the tribal attorneys have been furnished, 
by the department, with copies of the petition filed by Mr. Ballinger for the pur- 
pose of enabling them to make such inquiry into these cases prior to the convening 
of Congress as would bring out the facts determining the applicants' equitable title to 
enrollment. 

Several hundred of the petitions filed by Mr. Ballinger have during the last several 
months past been forwarded to this office by the department, with instructions to 
advise the department whether applications for enrollment had been filed by these 
petitioners within the period allowed by law during which such applications could be 
received. The majority of these petitions were filed by persons seeking enrollment as 
citizens by blood and as freedmen of the Creek Nation. Many of the petitioners seek 
enrollment as citizens by blood and freedmen of the Cherokee Nation. 

Altogether, I am advised that perhaps 400 separate p^ttitions have been filed by 
Mr. Ballinger and transmitted by the department to this office. It is estimated that 
these petitions involve the rights of i)erhai)s 1,500 individuals. This indicates the 
broad scope of the operations of Mr. Ballinger and his assistants, who began work in 
Oklahoma preparing these particular cases just a little more than one year ago. The 
value of the pro])erty involved in the claims of these petitioners, making a rough esti- 
mate thereof, easily reaches $2,000,000, and in all probability a close study of same will 
show that as much as $3,000,000 in property rights are involved. AH the petitions sent 
this office by the department have been relurned, and as no file was kept of them here, 
I am compelled to make my estimate of the number from the persons who handled 
them in this office. 

I have endeaA'ored to list the petitions transmitted to Mr. Hurley by the depart- 
ment, and I have found 40 cases invoh-ing the rights of 210 persons, all seeking enroll- 
ment as Choctaw citizens. Taking the generally acceptecl estimate of the property 
value of an indiddual interest in the Choctaw Nation, viz, $5,000, as a basis upon 
■which to form an estimate of the amount of property involved in these 40 cases ]ust 
named, and multiplying $5,000 by 240, we have the startling total of $1,200,000. 

I give these figures to show the importance of these matters to the tribes interested. 



56 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, I'Jl". 

I ha^■e had but little time to assist Mr. Hurley in the iuAestigation of these enroll- 
ment cases, as I am the only person connected with this office who is assigned to gen- 
eral inspecting work, and I have merely spent what time I could from my regular 
work in assisting him . A work of such vast importance, to be done thoroughly, should 
have constant attention of a number of experienced investigators for some months. 
I have not been instructed and ha\'e made no attempt to investigate anj^ of the 
petitions filed by Mr. Ballinger other than those of persons seeking enrollment as 
citizens of the Choctaw Nation with the exception of one case that I have investigated 
for the Chickasaw national attorney, Hon. Reford Bond. Howe\-er, incidentally, I 
have taken a few affidavits and depositions in connection with petitions filed for 
enrollment as citizens of other tribes wherein criminal practices were indicated. 

My purpose in this report, of course, is not to go into the merits of the indiA'idual 
cases investigated by me, as I leave that for Mr. Hurley to do. I desire merely to 
bring your attention, in a general way, to the facts uncovered by my inAestigation 
which show reprehensible and criminal practices on the part of tlie individuals 
employed by Webster Ballinger in connection with the preparation of these cases, 
that you may be informed concerning what is going on in connection therewith 
within the limits of the Five Tribes, and esi^ecially the nature of the business conducted 
by these persons under the same roof with your office. 

On October 15, ]914, Mr. Webster Ballinger came to Muskogee and engaged, in 
person, tliree office rooms located on the second floor back of the Metropolitan Build- 
ing, the building occupied, as you know, by your offices, together with the offices 
of other United States officials. It is my understanding that Mr. Ballinger did not 
remain here long, establishing in these offices Mr. Mat M. Lindly, an attorney of 
McAlester, Okla.. and Mr. Perry Rodkey, an attorney of Okomah. Okla. Printed 
on the outside doors of these offices appear the names of Webster Ballinger, M. M. 
Lindly. and Perry Rodkey. I attach sample of the letterheads used by these attor; 
neys. (See Exhibit A.) Upon this letterhead appears the name of Webster Bal- 
linger, attorney at law, rooms 245-247 Metropolitan Building, Muskogee, Okla., which 
occupies the center of the paper, with the names of M. ^M. Lindly and Perry Rodkey 
in the upper left-hand corner. 

The manager of the Metropolitan Building, Mr. J. L. Wagner, advises me that Mr. 
Ballinger assumed the responsibility fcr the payment of the rent for the offices named, 
and has paid it since by his personal check. (It might be noted just here, however, 
that Mr. Wagner stated to me that a number of Mr. Ballinger's checks had been re- 
turned unpaid by the bank in Washington upon which they were drawn.) 

From the time these offices were occupied, Mr. Lindly has been on duty practically 
daily, apparently in charge of the work. Mr. Rodkey has spent some time here, but 
it is my understanding that he has operated out of Okemah, Okla., his home town. 
I am jnepared to establish the fact that Mr. Lindly has been ])aid a salary by Web.«ter 
Ballinger, of Washington, D. C, at least a pa-t of the time, since entering into these 
cases, besides his office expenses being paid ]> ■ Mr. Ballinger. There is in existence, 
I understand, a contract between Mr. Ballini. er and the other two attoi'neys named, 
which ])robably pro\ades that these attorneys are to share with Mr. Ballinger in any 
fees that may be hereafter allowed in these cases. I have made but little inquiry 
concerning the history of Mr. Rodkey, or co:i(,'erning his reputation at this time. As 
he has maintained headquarters at Okemah and I have been investigating the Choctaw 
cases out of ^luskogee, I have not had occasioii to devote any time to an investigation 
of his operations. Mr. II. B. Seddicum, Govt^rnment farmer at Okemah, Okla., uses 
the following language in k letter addressed to me referring to Mr. Rodkey: 

"Mr. Rodkey has nothing here only his horre. and that is heavily incumbered, and 
in fact, \xutil he went to work for Webster Ballitiger, he was in a very bad way finan- 
cially, but I understand he is getting his expenses paid while doing this work, and 
will get a good bonus when Ballinger gets his commission. * * * He has no office 
here, but is working sometin)es in the office of Charles E. Guthrie and Z. J. Thompson." 

I quote further from his letter as follows: 

"I have nevei' heard ]\Ir. Rodkey represent that they were connected with or were 
Government officers or employees, but said thej' were being greatly assisted by Mr. 
Allen's office, the national attorney, as they were close together at I\Iuskogee, and when 
the parties came over there part of them were taken care of in his office, and they were 
also being assisted by the office of the Five Civilized Tribes, and the department knew 
and approved of what they were doing. (See Exhibit B.) 

It should be needless for me to comment that Mr. Rodkey's alleged representations 
to Mr. Seddicum concerning the assistance rendered by Judge Allen's office and the 
office of the superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes is an absolute misrepresenta- 
tion. Judge Allen denies that he rendered any assistance whatever to these persons, 
and I know that the office of the Five Ci^dlized Tribes has not given them any aid. 



INDIAN Al'PKOPRIAlION UIIJ., 1M7. 57 

Mr. Piodkey's alleged stateinent that the department knew and approved of their 
work is without doubt also a misrepresentation. Such statemer.ts, however, are mild 
indeed when compared with the misrein'esentations made by Mr. Lindly and his 
a^isociates, which will be hereafter commented upon. 

Mat M. Lindly, who ha? practically been in charge of the Muskogee office of Mr. 
I^allinger since he opened the same, is a resident of McAlester, Okla. He was, several 
>ears ago, Chief Deputy United States marshal at McAlester, but, I am reliably in- 
formed, lost his position on account of excessive use of intoxicants. He \\'as admitted 
to the bar at McAlester, and since has been employed in the preparation of enrollment 
cases in which Mr. Balliuger has been interested, together with a limited amount of 
probate practice. I attach a letter from Supervising Field Clerk S. G. Brink (see 
Exhibit C), who has been acquainted with Mr. Lindly for several years, having been . 
formerly stationed at McAlester, from which I quote as follows: 

"He (Mr. Lindly) has not been entirely sober or out from under the influence of 
liquor for several years, at least that is my impression, because I do not think I ever 
got near him that the smell of liquor was not aground him . ' ' 

I attach also a letter addressed me by Field Clerk R. L. Allen, of McAlester (see 
Exhibit D), in which he uses the following language with reference to Mr. Lindly: 

"I have interviewed three business men of this city relative to the standing of 
Mat M. Lindly, and in each their reply was practically the same: "His standing in the 
city of McAlester is very low.' I am not personally acquainted with Mr. Lindly, 
but from what I have been able to learn about him he is a man addicted to the excessive 
use of intoxicants, and Mill stoop pretty low for a dollar, and has been engaged to 
some extent in grafting among the Indians." 

I find upon investigation that Mr. Lindly 's chief lieutenant in this work has been 
Nelson Durant, an intelligent, fairly vrell educated negro, m ho poses as a lawyer and 
preacher. He has the reputation in police circles of being a resourceful crook who has 
made a livelihood for years by jjracticing deception and fraud, principally upon the 
members of his own race. He has been in jail several times in Muskcgee and \Vagoner 
Counties, charged with obtaining money under false pretense, and has served one term 
in the Oklahoma State Penitentiary at McAlester, Okla., having been sentenced there 
from Muskogee County in March, 1909, for a term of three years, having been con- 
victed upon the charge of obtaining money under false pretense. He was discharged 
on expiration pardon August 27, 1911. I attach his photograph, which I obtained 
from the warden of the penitentiary, which gives his prison number as 803. (See 
Exiiibit E.) 

Durant has been one of the chief organizers. Perhaps 20 or 30 other negroes have 
been employed as field workers, and in this way the applicants v/ere asseml)led and 
herded into Muskogee. It is a fact well knowii to most of the occ iipan.ts of this build- 
ing that thousands of negi'oes have visited the offices of Ballinger, Lin,dly & Rodkey 
during the past year. They have simply gone up to these offices in droves, filling the 
halls and making themselves generally obnoxious to the occupants of the other offices 
on the second floor. 

Mr. .Taneway, formerly chief of field diAdsion, advised me recently that ^^r. Lin.dly 
had told him that Mr. Julius Golden, the n.otary public who took the acknowledg- 
ments t(j the ])etitions and aflidavits prepared in the Muskogee office of these attorneys, 
had made ])erha])s as much as $1,500 (luring the last year in fees (Lindly remarking 
incidentally that he was complaining because one or two owed him small fees). This 
large amount of money indicates the extent of the business done by these attorneys. 

I believe a close investigation will bear me out in the statement that out of the 
several thousand persotis who have visited the offices of tliese attorneys since they 
were opened that 99 per cent have been persons of negro blood. 

Through the efforts of the large number of negroes a.ssociated with ^Ir. Lindly 
and Durant, it was advertised throughout most sections of the Five Civilizocl Tribes 
that the rolls of these tribes had been reo])ened, and that CJovernmeut men from 
\\'ashington, D. C, had establi.'^hed themselves in the Indian agency building at 
Muskogee for the purpose of taking a])plications. 

Mr. Lindly has posed as the Government re"j>resentative. There is no doubt in 
my mind that he has led these gullible negroes to believe that he was rei)resentin.g the 
United States Government in the work being done by him. I will hereafter refer 
to testimony of various persons who have sworn Ihat 'Sir. Lindly so rei)re.senled him- 
self to them. Every circumstance — -the renting of Ihese offices in what was practi- 
cally a Governmen.t building, the em]iloyment of criminal negroes in the organizations, 
and the uniform system of nusre"])re.sentations ijracticed by them — all eslablish, in 
my mind, the fact that a well-laid scheme was concocted l)y the originators of this 
business. It is the evident purijose of Balliuger, Lindly & Rodkey to so operate 
their business that the responsibility for the violation of law will rest upon the negro 



58 INDIAN APPEOPEIAIION BILL, 1917. 

tools who have been. ein])loyed i)y them. I shall first attempt a detailed statement 
of facts shown, by my investigation of the Choctaw enrollment cases investigated. 

Durant occnpied office No. 245 of the suite rented by I\Ir. Ballinger, which served, 
to some extent, as a waiting room. Mr. Lindly occupied office Xo. 247, which con- 
nects with the former through an alcove. A very small room about the size of a large 
clo.set, but with an. outside entrance, is sandwiched between these two offices and is 
numbered 246, I l)elieve, but is connected with only the one office No. 247. 

The evidence shows that Durant examined the pro.spective applicants first; that 
he had copies of the printed roll of the Five Tribes, which he consulted in coiinection 
with his interviews with these persons; that he made pencil memoranda which he 
worked out and submitted to Mr. Lindly, who himself prepared the petitions on a type- 
writer for the signature of the applican.ts. The data from which the affidavits were 
prepared in support of the petition.s was made out in like manner by Durant and written 
out in proper form by Mr. Lindly, in person, on a typewriter. 

The little office referred to seems to have been used by Durant as a private consul- 
tation room where he extorted money from the applicants. 

Mr. Hurley and I obtained exhaustive dei:)Ositions from a dozer or more persons 
who have filed petitions through the attorneys named for enrollment as citizens by 
blood of (he Choctaw Nation. All of these applicants are negroes of the illiterate, 
unreliable type. In their examinations they were nervous and evasive, demonstrat- 
ing fully both by their conduct on the witness stand and by their answers that their 
claims are in fact fraudulent. Their petitions as drawn by Mr. Lindly, su]rported 
by affidavits, establish prima facie cases. In each case examined the petitioner 
alleges blood relationship with persons connected with prominent full-blood Choctaw 
families, who are identified in such petitions by roll number. Cross-examination of 
these negro claimants develops the fact that they have no knowledge whatever of 
any relationship to the persons whose identity is so positively asserted in petitions 
signed by them. If these claimants signed these petitions, knowing the contents 
thereof, they committed perjury in so doing. The person who supplied the data 
upon which "these petitions Avere base<l must have necessarily known that these allega- 
tions were false, and any claim based thereupon fraudulent. They are therefore, in 
fact, guilty of subornation of perjury. Attention is invited to the fact that Durant 
furnished the data and Mr. Lindly wrote the petitions. 

A dozen or more professional witnesses were constantly on hand at the Muskogee 
offices of these attorneys. Among those I name the following persons who seem to 
have acted as principal witnesses: 

Webster Burton, Alec Nail, William James, Will Moore, Ben Grayson, William 
McCombs, Dollie Stedham, D. L. (Tobe) Berryhill, William Thompson, aiul Wiley 
Mcintosh, jr. Most of these men acted as field workers also, together with Nelson 
Durant, Manna Bruner, Willie Vann, Charles Guthrie, Charles Gould, and Nelson 
Grubbs. 

All these witnesses and field workers are negroes, with the exception of William 
McCombs, Charles Gould. Charles Guthrie, Ben Grayson, and D. L. Berryhill; the 
first three named being white persons, and the last two named Creek Indians. Nelson 
Durant, Ben Grayson, William James, Wiley Mcintosh, jr., Will Moore, and Manna 
Brimer have served terms in the penitentiary. I attach photographs of all of them 
furnished me by the penitentiary officials, with the exception of the last two named. 

Dozens of the petitions filed by these attorneys in Creek cases have attached thereto 
the affidavits of ^^'illiam James (negro), and Ben Grayson (Crook Indian). In many 
of these cases an attempt is made to establish the case with their affidavits alone. 
Both of these men are o!' the most unreliable type. Either one of them would perjure 
himself in any matter for a small amount of money. I have not gone into anv of 
the Creek cases presented by Mr. Ballinger. but as we found the affidavit of ^^■illiam 
James attached to a number of the C'hoctaw cases filed by this attorney, we know 
positively that every affidavit made by him in these cases is absolutely false. Fur- 
ther reference will be made to his testimony later. I am attaching hereto a complete 
copy thereof. He is now in the Oklahoma State Penitentiary, as shown by his pho- 
tograph attached. (See Exhibit G.) Ben Grayson, as indicated by the data attached 
to hi"^ photogra))h (see Exhibit F), served a term at Leavenworth some years ago, 
bul r am adA-ised he is now wanted in Okmulgee County for passing bad checks. 

\\'iiliam Thompson (negro), now convict No. 0069 in the Oklahoma State Peniten- 
tiary (see photograph. Exhibit H), acted as a professional witness principally in Creek 
cases. He is now serving a term for perjury committed by him recently in Tulsa 
County. 

Wiley Mclnto-sh (negro), also acted as a professional witness in Creek cases. He 
is now serving a term in the State Penitentiary for having aided William James in 
perpetrating a fraud upon this office some few months ago in the matter of a Creek 
equalization payment. 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 59 

Will Moore (negro), who is said to have served a term at Leavenworth, acted as a 
witness for Mr. Ballinger in Creek cases. He is now wanted by the Muskogee County 
authorities, and is a fugitive from justice. 

Manna Bruner (negro), acted principally as a field worker, and is reported to have 
obtained money from various persons representing that he would enroll them. He 
has undoubtedly represented himself as a Government officer. I will hereafter refer 
to certain testimony concerning representations made by him. 

Willie Vann and Nelson Grubbe (negroes), have acted as principal field workers, 
and have, unquestionably, represented themselves as Government officers and have, 
under cover of such personation, obtained money from various persons. Extended 
reference will be made hereafter to the testimony taken referring to their operations. 

Dollie Stedham is an old Creek Freedman (an ex-slave), who has acted as a princi- 
pal witness in Creek cases. J. E. Bentley, field clerk at Okmulgee, Okla., makes 
the following comment in a letter to me referring to this woman: 

"I believe I am safe in saying that she is a person who would make most any kind 
of an affidavit in order to get hold of a little money." 

D. L. Berryhill, an old Creek Indian who can scarcely write his name, has been 
used as a witness in almost every Creek case filed by Mr. Ballinger. He seems to 
maintain a fairly good reputation, and I am inclined to believe that he has been 
imposed upon by the persons associated with Mr. Ballinger. Alec Nail, in an ex- 
haustive statement made before me, testified as follows with reference to Berryhill: 

"Q. An old man named Berryhill acted as a witness. Did he drink? — A. Yes, 
sir; they were drunk nearly all the time. 

"Q. Did Mr. Lindly drink? — A. I have smelt it on his breath, and he acted like it." 

This may explain why Berryhill signed so many false affidavits. 

William McCombs, a full-blood Creek Indian, served as a witness in many Creek 
cases. He has acted for a number of years, as an interpreter around this country, 
working most of the time for grafters. I regard him as entirely unreliable. He is 
drunk most of the time. He is referred to in Alec Nails testimony as follows: 

■'They (referring to Ben Grayson and William James and others) were nearly drunk 
all the time, and old man McCombs was drunk also." 

Charles Gould (white), of Bristow or Dewey, Okla., has served as a field worker in 
Creek and Choctaw Nations. He represented himself to be in the Government 
service and offered to enroll persons for $50 each. See reference hereafter made 
concerning testimony gathered covering some of his operations. I have not inves- 
tigated his personal history, and I know little about him. 

Charles Guthrie (while) has operated out of Okemah, Okla., under Mr. Perry Rod- 
key. I know little about his history or present standing in the community and have 
not investigated his operations to any extent. However, I was in Tulsa recently 
and found that he had been there operating among the negroes. He had, through a 
negro notary public, G. W. Wilson, and another irresponsible negro named C'harley 
Willard, gathered together a large number of Tulsa negroes who filed application for 
enrollment. I investigated six or eight cases filed by these negroes wherein they 
ap])lied for enrollment as Choctaw Indians by blood and find in every case that the 
claimant is a negro who, in all jjrobability, has no seniblaTice of title to enrollm.ent as 
a citizen of any tribe whatever. It was, in fact, with difficulty that I induced some 
of them to come to Mr. Hurley's office, and, in fact, failed in an attempt to see sev- 
eral, as they had become alarmed and did not care to face the fraudulent claims made 
by Ihem. Ida Lewi-!, who (together with her hust)and, John Lewis) had ap|)lie(l for 
enrollment as a Choctaw by bload, told me ov-er the telephone, when I requested 
her to call to see me, that she wanted to drop the matter and did not want to have 
any more to do with it. 

1 find that the affidavits filed in support of practically all of these Choctaw cases 
were made by the professional negro wdtnesses, We])ster Burton, Alec Nail, and 
William James. These negroes followed no other occupation for months, and were 
in constant attendance in the Muskogee office of Mr. Ballinger, prepared at all times 
to make their thumb marks upon and swear to every aliidaA it ])re])ar(>d and i)ut before 
them by Mr. ]>a]linger' ; associates in this office. These witnesses were ]).ud from 50 
cents to §2.50 (uich by every applicant for whom they made an affidavit, and exacted 
a promise of additional consideration from many. I obtained exhaustive statements 
from each of these negro witnesses, and I attach comi)letc copies of such lestimonv. 

The affidavits of these witnesses, as they appear attached to the applications filed 
by Mr. Ballinger are relied upon to pro/e Ihit the applicant is of Choctaw blood, 
purporting to show clearly the ancestry from which this blood was derived, identifying, 
by roll number, many alleged blood relati\cs who were enrolled as Choctaws by 
blood, and going into detail as to why such ai)]ilicant h' d f viled of enrollment by the 
Dawes Commission. With not one oxcoi)tion, every I'.fFdavit filed by Mr. liallinger 



60 INDIAN APPFiOPUIATION BILL, 1917. 

in support of the petitions of these so-called ('hoctu.ws by blood, purporting to have 
been executed by these v'itnesses, is false in its entirety. These negroes testify, in 
the first place, that they had not known one of the applicants before they met such 
applicant in Mr. Ballinger's office at the time they made the affidavits. 

Alec Nail is an old negro of the ante bellum type. (See his photograph attd.ched 
as Exhibit K.) He is a Choctaw freedman, and has resided all of his life in the Choc- 
• taw Nation. He seems proud of the fact that he has had quite an extensive acquaint- 
ance among tlie Choctaws. In his egotism he almost goes to the extent of claiming 
that he knows every person who has lived in the Choctaw Nation since his boyhood. 
I imagine that he was in his glory seated in Mr. Biillinger's Muskogee office as his 
principal witness in Choctaw enrollment cases where he coidd boast, to his heart's 
content, before the hundreds of negroes who visited these offices. He at once became, 
in his own mind, a very important person. The money that was paid to him by 
these negro applicants for enrollment as citizens by blood doubtless caused his imag- 
ination to run riot, and led him to believe, for the moment perhaps, that certain 
persons, prominent Choctaws whom he had heard of all of his life, who were found 
upon the roll books by Durant, were in some way related to these applicants. Never- 
theless, he swears before me that he never met one applicant for whom he made an 
affidavit before he met such applicant in Mr. Ballinger's office. He admits that 
they all had the appearance of being of negro blood; admits that he does not believe 
that there is any relationship existing between these applicants and the persons with 
whom they claim relationship in their several petitions. When confronted with his 
various affidavits, he states that he told Lindly time and time again that he knew 
nothing about their ancestry, and that he was testifjang in these affidavits only that 
he knew the persons referred to therein, not intending to identify them as ancestors 
of the applicants. It is evident that Durant and Lindly have both been guilty of 
subornation of perjury in the preparation of all of these petitions and affidavits. 

I am setting out below excerpts from the testimoTiy of Alec Nail, given before me 
on July 31, 1915, with reference to certain features touched upon by me: 

''Q. \\Tiat is your occupation? — A.' Ain't able to do nothing now. 

"Q. '^Tiat have you been doing since you have been in Muskogee? — A. I not done 
anything. I liked to have died last summer and if it had not bgen for Mrs. Hester, 
Senator Owen's mother-in-law * * *_ 

"Q. Well, have you made any money at all since j^ou reached Muskogee? — A. None 
to amount to anything. 

"Q. Have you made any? — A. Sometimes when I witness for people down here 
they give me a dollar and sometimes $1.50. 

"Q. \\niat people do you refer to that paid you this money? — A. Those that claimed. 
* * * Those that make application for enrollment as citizenship. 

"Q. WTiere is that office located? — A. Metropolitan Building. 

"Q. Do you know the number of the room? — A. No, sir; I would not know it if I 
was looking at it. Rodkey, Lindly, and Ballinger is printed on the door of the office. 

■'Q. The Metropolitan Building is the building that the Indian agency is in? — A. 
Yes, sir. 

"Q. Do you know any of the persons that you signed affidavits for? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Were you personally acquainted with them? — A. No, sir; I don't believe 
I was. 

"Q. You merely accepted their statements as true, what they told you concerning 
their parentage? — A. I did not consider their statements; they would say they were 
kin to Willie Johnson. 

•'Q. Did you believe what thev told you or not?— A. I have just thought about 
that. 

''Q. You had no other reason, excei^t their own statements, to believe they were 
children of Choctaws ?^ — A. No, sir. 

■'Q. Do you know Mr. Ballinger? — A. I have never seen him. 

•'Q. Who keeps the oflice down there? — A. Nelson Durant and Judge Lindly. He 
type wrote whatever is down. 

"Q. Any other person? — A. Mr. Golden; he swears the people in. 

"Q. What did Mr. Lindly do, exactly?— A. lie type wrote and w^ould go in the 
room where the colored lawyer was. 

"Q. Would Durant \mte it down with a pencil? — A. I guess so. 

"Q. And would hand it over to Lindly and Lindly would write it out himself on the 
typewriter? — A. Yes, sir. 

•'Q. Were these affidavits read over to these persons before they signed them? — A. 
Well, the majority of times they were, at least mine were. 



IXDIAN ArPROPRIATION BILL, V.ni. 61 

■'Q. Your aflidavits were read over to you? — A. I supposed they were. I can't 
read. 

■'Q. The}- pretended to? — A. They had me lhinkin» so. 

:(: :i: ^ :{: ^ ^ :»; 

"Q. Did not all of these apy)licants or claimants think they [referring to Ballinger 
Lindly ct Rodkey] were in the Government service? — A. I am not positive about that, 
but it is likely to believe that they were in the Government service, for he would not 
take any pay for what he did — Mr. Laidly. 

■'Q. You think he was in the Government service? A. Yes, sir; I hear him say 
that you could not pay him a thousand dollars, and if the Goverujnent didn't have 
him, some one did." 

There is filed with the application for enrollment of Annie Abernathy, of Muskogee, 
Okla., who ai)plied for enrollment as a Chocta.w citizen by blocd, an affidavit purport- 
ing execution by Alec Nail before Julius Golden, a notary public, on May 6, 1915, in 
which Nail, among othei' things, testifies as follows: 

■'That he is well and personally acquainted with the aT>plicant and that he has 
known her since she was a small girl; that he was also well and personally accjuainted 
with both her father and mother. Her mother was Caroline Tyson, nee Frazier. He 
was a three-quarter Choctaw Indian by blood; that her father was Sam Tyson, who 
was a full-blood Chi'-kasaw Indian who lived in the Choctaw Nation, near old Fort 
Towson. * * * That the said mother had quite a number of brothers and sisters. 
[Here names several]. That her said father had brothers that I also knew. [Here 
names them.] * * * That he had known the applicant at the different places 
that .she has lived near Bokchito, Caddo, and in that part of the country until she 
came to Muskogee, some three or four years ago." 

I C£uote below from Alec Nail's testimony given before me on July 31, 1915, which is 
a part of the testimony referring to the affidavit from which I have jugt quoted: 

"Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. Not all that that is stated there. 

"Q. Did you sign a statement relative to these facts? — A. No, sir. They took the 
roll book out and pointed to a number and asked if I knew so and so, but they could get 
that without me. 

"Q. Did you swear that you knew all these applicants of your own personal knowl- 
edge? — A. No, sir. What did they call that woman, Annie Abernathy? 

"Q. Her name as it appears here is Annie Abernathy, nee Frazier. — A. She is just 
a yellow woman. She is not a Choctaw at all. She is just a nigger around Muskogee. 
That is all there is to it. 

"Q. You said just now you were not acquainted with this woman until she was in- 
troduced to you? — A. Yes, sir; they took out the roll book and asked me if. I knew a 
Frazier, and I said yes. 

"Q. You know nothing about this woman's parentage or any of her relatives? — A. 
No, sir. She had negro blood in her. I did not think she was related to them Fraziers, 
as they were Indians and this woman was negro. 

"Q. You say that Mr. Lindly wrote this affidavit? — *-\. He tyi^ewrote them and would 
give them to the colored lawyer. 

"Q. Was this colored lawyer in there all the time you made these affidavits? — A. 
Yes, sir. 

"Q. You were reciuired to raise your right hand and s\\ear to this aflidavit to which 
you attached your thumb mark? — A. Yes, sir." 

In an affidavit pur))orting execution by Nail, filed by Mr. Ilallingcr, with petition of 
Mary Reeves, nee Hampton, for enrollment as a citizen by blood of the ( "hoctaw Nation, 
Nail is made to testify, among other things, that he is well and personally actiuainted 
with the grandfather of the apj)licant. and that his name was Isaac Hampton. He is 
then made to go into the history of the Hampton family, pretending to i<lentify the 
applicant as the little girl whom he knew, that had lived with her grandfather just 
named. With reference to this aOirlavit Nail testified l)ef(jre me, in part, as follows: 

"Q. Did you sign an aflidavit as a witness for a Avoinan named Hampton? — -A. I 
think so. 

"Q. You had not seen nor known this woman previous to the time she came here? — 
A. Never seen her until that day. 

"Q. Was she a colored woman? A. Yes. sir: she was a yellow woman. 

"Q. Do you remember who she claimed were her parents? — .\. I think she claimed 
that she was kin to the Hamptons down there, to the Choctaw lIaltiii)toiis down there. 
She claimed to be related to them. 

* * * -/r -^ * v 

"Q. You mean tliat you would take what was .said about their jiarents and swear 
to what they told you? — A. No, sir; I would only swear to what 1 knew aljout the 
Indians." 



62 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, 1017. 

I quote further from the testimony of Alec Nail: 

"Q. Do you remember what this woman [referring to Alice Cole, an applicant for 
enrollment as a Choctaw by blood] paid you for making this affidavit?— A. She 
promised to give me $2.50, but I only got a dollar. 

"Q. What did Durant get from this applicant? — A. That is the secret part of it. 

"Q. Did you ever see the applicants give him any money?— A. No, sir; you could 
not sec them. 

" Q. Why? — A. Because they went in that cutoff so you could not see them, little 
room there. 

" Q. Who went in there with him? — -A. Durant and the claimants. 

"Q. Were they alone? — -A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. He seemed to do all of the talking? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Who paid Mr. Golden, the notary public? — ^A. Those people who made the 
affidavits that would be |2 as they said the law required them to have two wit- 
nesses and would charge $2. 

"Q. What was that for? — ^A. Notary fees they called it. 

"Q. Do you know a person named Jane Driver? — -A. I don't remember. 

" Q. Did you sign an affidavit identifjdng such a person in Mr. Ballinger's office? — • 
A. No, sir; I never identified a soul in that office. They had not a man in that office 
that I knew. 

* * • * * * * * 

_ "Q. Was Judge Lindly in the room when these applicants were examined? — A. Yes, 
sir; they were examined by him. 

"Q. All of them? — A. Yes, sir; the witnesses were examined by him. 

"Q. Who examined them first? — ^A. Well, it was written clown by Nelson Dm'ant 
in a little room. 

"Q. How many rooms have they? — A. Two outside the little room. 

"Q. How large is the little room you speak of? — A. A very little room. 

"Q- Which room is Nelson Durant in? — A. Next to where the white ladies work. 

"Q. Which office did he have, the one the applicants waited in?^A. He staid in 
the room where the applicants first went. 

"Q. And Lindly was in the other room? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Would they first be examined by Nelson Durant? — A. I don't know whether 
you would call it that. 

"Q. Would he ask them questions first?- — A. Yes, sir; he was guided by the roll 
book, got their roll number and age from the roll book. 

"Q. And after he examined them would he take them in to Mr. Lindly ?• — A. Yes, 
sir; a great part of the time; he would hold what he was reading. 

"Q. He read it off to Lindly? — A. Yes, sir; the applicants did not have much to 
say when they came in there. It was already written off. 

"Q. Did he question you as to what you knew about the applicants?^A. Yes, sir; 
about every one of them. 

"Q. Mr.'Lindly did?— A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. I thought you said he took what Nelson Durant would tell him.^ — A. It is this 
way, Nelson Durant would wiite up what the applicant had to say and hand it to 
Mr. Lindly and then Mr. Lindly would question me about what I knew about the 
applicants and write it out on the typewriter. 

"Q. Would Nelson Durant question you first as to what you knew about the appli- 
cants? — A. Yes, sir; he would ask me if I knew these people. A woman or man 
would claim to be a Choctaw; take the Hunter family: Do you know Thomas Hunter, 
that he has a grandson, do you know that, and I would say yes, sir. 

"Q. You know nothing about the ancestry of this woman who calls herself Jane 
Driver?— A. No, sir. 

"Q. Do you know whether she is a Choctaw by blood? — A. No, sir; I don't believe 
there is a bit in her. 

"Q. This woman who calls herself Jane Driver, was she a negro? — A. Looks just 
about like I do. 

"Q. Jiist about your color? — A. Yes, sir; about my color. [Dark-brown skin.] 

"Q. In this affidavit which you made in support of the petition of Jane Driver for 
enrollment as a citizen of the Choctaw Nation by blood you are made to state that 
you knew this applicant when she was a small child; that you remember that she 
could not talk to amount to an>^hing; that she was mentally all right but did not have 
the faculty of speech. Did you state this in Mr. Ballinger's office? — ^A. No, sir; 
there was no need of it. 

"Q. Did you know this woman when she was a small child? — A. No, sir." 

In an affidavit made before Julius Golden, a notary public, on June 22, 1915, filed 
by ]\fr. Ballinger in support of the petition of Josie L. Arnold, nee Lewis, for enroll- 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 63 

ment as a citizen by blood of the Chickasaw Nation, Alec Nail is made to testify in 
part as follows: 

"That he knows the applicant, Josie L. Arnold; that he also knew her mother, 
Sofia Lewis, nee Kemp, and all the Kemp family; that the father of her mother, 
Sofia Lewis, nee Kemp, was Jackson Kemp. * * * The applicant was raised bp 
old Aunt Caldonia Green, a colored woman, who was formerly the slave of her grand- 
father, Jackson Kemp." 

In his examination by me on July 31, 1915, relative to this petitioner, Josie L. 
Arnold, Alec Nail testified in part as follows: 

"Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. I know the name of some of those Kemps, 
they would ask me about people named Kemp that I knew, and I would state whar 
I knew. This woman was looked up on the roll and they would ask me if I knew the 
Kemps, and say go to work and name how many you know, and I would go and name 
as many as I knew. 

"Q. You can not say that you know this applicant? — A. No, sir; I know I don'r 
know her. 

"Q. You did not know any of the people that you met in that office? — A. No, sir. 
* -x- * * * * * 

"Q. Did you know a Sofia Lewis, who was a Kemp before she was married? — A. I 
don't know; I can't remember. 

"Q. Did you ever know a Jackson Kemp? — ^A. Why, sure; yes, sir. 

"Q. What relation was Jackson Kemp to Sofia Kemp? — A. I couldn't say. 

"Q. You were made to swear in this affidavit that I read you that this woman who 
appeared in the office downstairs is a daughter of Sofia Lewis, who has been a Kempj 
and that Jackson Kemp was the father of Sofia Kemp. What do you know about 
that? — A. I don't know nothing about that. I don't know who Sofia Lewis was; 
she may have been the mother of the one making application. 

Q. You do not remember Sofia Lewis? — A. No, sir; I don't. 

******* 

"Q. WTiat blood was Jackson Kemp?— A. He was a full-blood. He looked to be. 

"Q. Full-blood what?— A. Chickasaw. 

" Q. Did you make an affidavit down there for any person who was not a negro? — A. 
Not to my knowledge, except Jackson Barrett, and another white man I forget; let's 
see, Mr. Eubanks. 

******* 

"Q. Wei'e all the women for whom you made affidavits down-stairs negroes? — A. 
Yes, sir; all negroes, I believe. 

******* 

"Q. Can you read? — K. A little in the Bible. Can't read to do no good. 
"Q. Can you sign your name? — A. Oh, no. Can't write a line. 

******* 

"Q. Mr. Lindly knew that you did not know this woman? — A. Yes, sir; I told 
him so. 

******* 

"Q. So Mr. Lindly wrote on the typewriter the affidavit that you made?— A. Yes, 
sir. 

"Q. And you say you told Mr. Lindly that you did not know any of the applicants, 
and did not intend to identify them? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Well, what were you doing down there?— A. I would prove that I knew the 
Choctaws. Advise them. 

******* 

"Q. It was your understanding that you were merely to testify that such a Choctaw 
family lived at one time, and you would testify as to remembering that family; you 
did not testify that the claimants were related to any of the members of the families 
you have mentioned?— A. No, sir; I couldn't." 

As a matter of fact, investigation tends to show that this claimant for enrollment, 
Jo.sie \j. Arnold, was probably ])orn and reared in Louisiana, not having removed to 
this country until some few years ago, although she swore before me that she was 
born and rai.'scd in the Chickasaw Nation at Wiley. ITor claim is absolutely fraudu- 
lent, and she committed ])erjury in her testimony l)ofore me. 

I quote further from Alec Nail's testiniony as foll()\ss: 

"Q. Do you recall a woman who claimed to be a descendant of the Wright family 
of choctaws? — A. I recall a woman that claimed to be a daughter of old Leonard 
Wri'dit . 



64 INDIAN APPROPRIATIOlSr BILL, 1917. 

I 

" Q. Had you ever seen tliis woman 1)efore you met her in Mr. P>allinger'H office? — 
A. Never did. 

******* 

" Q. Was Leonard Wright a brother of okl Goa". Wright? — A. Yes, sir; Allen Wright's 
father at McAlester. 

"Q. W'cvQ they full-bloods? — A. Yes, sir: old Gov. Wright was a full-blood. 
******* 

" Q. Was this woman who claimed to be a daughter of Leonard Wright a negro? — A. 
Yes, sir: she was yellow. 

"Q. She was yellow?— A. Yes, sir; I told them to send that [indicating papers in 
this case filed l>y Ballinger] to McAlester, but they would not do it. Three Te.x:as 
witnesses were there to that. 

"Q. You say they had three Texas witnesses to witness that? — ^A. They had two; 
I will say that. Bill McOombs brought them up here. 

******* 

"Q. Do you know Jarnes Goings? — A. Yes, sir; I know a Jim Goings since I have 
been here. 

"Q. Did you first meet him in Mr. Ballinger's office? — A. Yes, sir; the first time 
in my life. 

(This man is an applicant for enrollment as a Ghuctaw citizen by blood. W. L. B.) 

"Q. Do you know the father a:id mother of this applica it, Jim Goings? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Do you know whether the father's name was Henry and the mother's name 
was Frances? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Did you ever know a Henry and Frances Goings? — A. Yes. sir; I have heard 
of that family; but that thing [indicating affidavit] was made a long time before I 
saw it. 

■■Q. What do you mean? — A. They took his application in a long time before 
they knew I was here. I was sick, but they referred him to me, and when I got up 
his application was made out already, and I was just asked about the Goings family, 
and 1 said I knew them. 

* * * * * * * 

"Q. There is an affidaAit attached to this application filed by Mr. Webster Bal- 
linger. acknowledged by yoii before Julius Golden, a notary public, on March 23, 
1915, in which you are made to state that you first met this applicant more than 30 
years ago at Doaksville. — A. No, sir. 

"Q. And that you were well and personally acquainted with the father and mother 
of this applicant. Henry and Frances Goings, and that you knew the brothers of 
Henry (iidngs, and that their names were George, James, and Alfred? — A. I do not 
know that at all; they are all on the rolls, them I gave. 

"Q. And that their oldest one died before the war. Did you make this statement 
to any person in ^Slr. Ballinger's office? — A. Not like you are reading it. 

* * * ■ * * * * 

"Q. You did not know any of the people that you met in that office? — A. No, sir. 
"Q. What office do you mean when yon refer to that office? — A. Well, it says 
Ballinger, llodkey & Lindly. They say it is their names on that door. 

******* 

"Q. Do you know how much you got for making this aflJidavit? — A. No, sir; some- 
times I got a dollar, sometimes §1.50, and sometimes $2. 

"Q. Who gave you this money? — A. The applicants; the one making the applica- 
tion. They paid me the money I got. 

•' Q. Did" you ask for the money?— A. They said if you do not pay the witnesses and 
notary fees the papers do not go out of the office. They said that they was to get 
two old members of the tribe, and I was in the Dawes Commission one day and they 
employed me to see about it. I did not have any confidence in it. 

"Q. You told me, did you not, that most persons who applied for enrollment down 
there in their office as Indians by blood were negroes? — A. Every one of them. 

"Q. And they tried to get on the blood roll?— A. Yes, sir; and I would say, why 
don't you get on the rolls with me; but they said they would get on the blood roll." 

I have quoted rather fully fnmi the testimony of Alec Nail, for the reason that it 
shows clearly the cliaracter of the work done by Mr. Ikillinger and his assistants in- 
Oklahoma. A review of the twenty-five or more enrollment cases filed by Mr. Web- 
ster Ballinger, which have the artidavits of this chief witness. Alec Nail, attached, 
shows that all of them were prepared under the same circumstances, being, in fact, 
manufactured cases from the beginning. 



INDIAN AFI'ROPRIATIOX BILL, 1917, 65 

Wobpter Burton, another chief ])rofessi()nal Avntness in Choctaw enrollment cases 
tiled by Mr. Ballinger, is a negro of the illiterate class, entirely unreliable; in fact, of 
the indolent petty-thief type. He is a Chickasaw freedman, and his sole occupation 
for months was loafiug around the offices of Ballinger, Lindly & Rodkey, getting what 
money he could from the negro asjnrants for enrollment as citizens by blood of the 
Choctaw Nation for making afhdaA'its for them. 

Dozens of these worthless, perjured affidavits signed by thumb print accompany 
petitions of various persons applying for enrollment as Choctaws by blood filed by 
Mr. Webster Ballinger. Althougli in these affidavits Burton is made to testify to 
family histories of these applicants in detail, he testified before me as follows: 

"Q. You made quite a mimber of affida\ats down there? — A. Well, I signed some. 

■'Q. In Mr. Ballinger's office? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. How many affidavits do you suppose you made? — A. J have no idea. 

"Q. Were you personally acquainred with all the persons for whom you made 
afhdavits? — A. Was I acquainted with them? 

"Q. Were you personally acquainted with them? — A. No, sir; I was not. 

"Q. Were you acquainted Avith any of them? — A. No one. I told them that. 

"Q. You had never seen one of the persons? — A. No, sir; never seen them." 

Continuing, he testifies how these affidavits were prepared: 

"Q. Who prepared the affidavits that you signed? Wlio wTote them? — A. Lindly 
type wTote them out. 

' "Q. Did you tell him what to wTite in thses affidavits? — A. No, sir; I told him of 
the Indian people I knew. 

••C^. Did Mr. Diu-ant have anytliing tri do with the preparation of these affida- 
vits? — A. Well, I am going to speak that the best I know how. Durant would fill 
them out. 

"Q. He would write them out \nth a typewTiter? — A. Yes, sir; whatever tribe 
these people were, he would WTite that out and if I knew that tribe, he would write 
that out. I gave them all to understand that I didn't know them. 

"Q. Did Durant question you himself as to your knowledge? — A. No, sir. 

■'Q. Did Mr. Lindly question you as to the extent of your knowledge? — A. No, dr; 
he didn't. 

"Q. Did he simply write out these affidavits without asking you?— A. He wrote 
these affidavits from the questions wTote otit from the roll book, for the Indians on 
the roll. 

"Q. Who would find them on the roll? — A. Durant or those Indians would take 
the roll book and find them. 

"Q. After these affidavits were written up on tlie typewTiter by Mr. Lindly were 
the affidavits read to you? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. By whom?— A. Golden. 

"Q. By Golden?— A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. He was a notary? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Can "you write your name? — A. Can't write at all, or read. 

•'Q. You signed these affidavits by thumb mark? — A. Yea, sir." 

Burton acknowledges that he was paid from 50 cents to |2.50 each for making these 
affidavits, and that he had been promised as much as $100 additional by eeveral appli- 
cants, if they were successful in securing enrollment. 

I quote from a letter dated August 9, 1915, addressed to me by Mr. M. L. Garrett, 
United Stat38 probate attorney at Tishomingo, referring to Webster Burton: 
"I have talked to several who know him while he lived in the Adcinity of ^lilburn, 
Okla., and the most of them say that his reputation was pretty bad, that they never 
knew of his being prosecuted for any crime except the one mentioned al)0A'e (fornica- 
tion)." 

I quote further from the testimony of Webster Burton given before me: 

"Q. Have you been in the penitentiary? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Have you been in jail? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. How many times have you been in jail? — A. I can't tell you. 

"Q. A number of times? — A. Several times. 

" Q. What were you charged with?— -A . Whisky and fighting. 

"Q. Whisky selling? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Introducing? — A. Yes, sit. 

******* 

■'Q. What counties were you in jail?— A. I have been in jail in Fort Smith and 
Tishomingo." 

I am attaching hereto a copy of Burton's testimony before me. I could go into 
detail and show the different false affidavits that were made by him, referred to in this 

25134— PT 4— 16 5 . _ . 



66 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

testimony, but I believe all tliat it is necessary for me to state here is that it would be 
practically a repetition of the testimony of Alec Nail, as set out above. Every affi- 
davit purporting to have been made by this man and filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger 
is false practically in its entirety. 

Another negro professional witness of Ballinger, Lindly & Rodkey is William James, 

heretofore referred to, now serving as convict No. 6087 in the Oklahoma State Peni- 

•ientiary. His affidavit is submitted by Mr. Ballinger in support of a dozen or more 

'Choctaw petitions for enrollment, and perhaps as many as 50 Creek petitions for 

•enrollment. He is of the criminal type, and would perjure himself in any matter for 

3. small sum of money. He has never resided in the Choctaw Nation, yet we find his 

a,ffidavit, as stated, attached to a dozen or more petitions filed l)y Mr. Ballinger on 

behalf of persons seeking enrollment as choctaw citizens by blood, which are intended 

to prove the Choctaw blood of such applicants and trace the blood relationship of the 

-applicants to certain Choctaw ancestors. It is needless to make the comment that 

these affidavits are entirely false. James, in his testimony before me, frankly admits 

that he had no knowledge of the facts testified to by him in these various affidavits. 

I quote briefly from his statement made before me as follows : 

"Q. Were you paid anything for mailing these affida\dts? — A. No, sir; I wasn't 
paid anything; not until they got it through outside of a little expense money. 

"Q. If the men got these cases through, what were you to rceeive? — A. I was to get 
$25 a head. 

"Q. You were to get $25 a head?— A. Yes, sir. 

^'Q. Who promised you that? — ^A. The ones that were making the applications. 
■"'Q. Did Mr. Lindly or Durant, or anyone else, sanction that? — A. No, sir. They 
ididn't sanction that at all; the applicants that were making the applications if they 
got through were to pay the witness fee. 

"Q. How did the applicants come to promise you $25? — A. For making a witness 
for them" 

"Q. Did you ask the witnesses to agree to pay you $25 for acting as a witness for 
them? — A. I asked them what they would allow me for making it: for helping them 
through . 

■'Q. You exacted that? — A. Yes, sir. 

^'Q. You said just now, James, that you wert to have your expenses paid. Who 
agreed to pay your expenses? — A. The ones who were making applications gave me 
50 cents." 

Julius Golden, a notarv public of Muskogee, Okla., has taken the acknowledgments 
to all of the petitions and affidavits made in support thereof prepared in the Muskogee 
office of Ballinger, Lindly & Rodkey, as heretofore shown. Testimony of these 
applicants and witnesses shows that the applicants paid Golden, as notary fees, from 
75 cents to $2. In most instances they were charged $2, whereas the petitions pre- 
sented by Mr. Ballinger elo not contain more than three or four jurats. The State 
law prescribes 25 cents as a maximum fee allowed a notary public for signing and 
placing his seal upon a jurat. It is shown that Golden did not do any clerical work 
1 n connection with the preparation of these affidavits. Mr. Lindly has been accredited 
with the statement that Golden has made, during the last year, as much as $1,500 in 
notary fees from the applicants who appeared at the Muskogee offices of Ballinger, 
lindly & Rodkey. However, Mr. Golden states to me that all jurats were signed and 
sealed by him in triplicate, and that he In no case charged more than the legal fee. 
It is reasonable to suppose* that he has divided his fees with Lindly and Rodkey, but 
this is denieel. Golelon is a real estate elealer, and has resided in Muskogee for seven 
or eight years. He appe-ils to me as a cautious Jew, not very conscientious, but he 
would take precautions to avoiel violating any law. I do not believe he would hesitate 
to enter any scheme to defraud, if he thought that he could not be reached by the law 
for his connection therewith. So in tliis case. When I brought to his attention the 
fact that it had been established that practically all of the affidavits made before him 
by the applicants and witnesses in these .enrollment cases were false, he inquired if I 
thought there was any danger in his continuing to take acknowledgments in such 
cases. Of course, I advised him that he would have to exercise his own judgment in 
the matter, but personally I certainly would not care to have my jurat attached to 
-perjured affidavits. I understand that he continued to act as notary for the attorneys 
named after his conversation with m(i just referred to. 

As stated previously by me hendn, precaution has evidently been taken by the 
principals connectetl with this enrollment work to avoid criminal prosecution for 
the outrageous fraud perpetrated by them and their agents upon many ignorant 
citizens of this State, and for the assistance given through unscrupulous, elesigning 
persons, mostly Negroes, in an attempt to perpetrate fraud upon the Five Civilized 
^Tribes by the presentation of scores of false claims for enrollment. 






INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL, 1917. 67 

I understand that the petitions presented by Mr. Ballinger were not accepted by 
the department as applications for eru'ollment. Therefore no United States statute 
could be resorted to under which to prosecute any of the persons shown to be guilty 
of preparing or making the false and perjm-ed affidavits referred to. On the other 
hand, I do not believe that any State law covers the case. False swearing before a 
notary public in such a matter does not appear to be defined as perjury by the stat- 
utes of this State. 

I shall now refer to other criminal featm'es brought out in connection with my 
investigation of these enrollment cases. 

In the first place, there has evidently been a conspii'acy formed to lead as many 
ignorant persons as possible to believe that the rolls of the Five Tribes have been 
reopened, and that Mr. Ballinger and his associates were Government agents sent 
out for the purpose of enrolling all those persons who were entitled to enrollment 
who failed in securing their rights before the Dawes Commission. Two intelligent, 
shrewd, unscrupulous, designing negroes. Nelson Durant and William H. Vann, 
have proved the most active chief lieutenajits. 

As stated pre^•iously herein, Durant is an excon\ict. He poses as a lawyer and 
preacher, but I am ad\dsed that he has never been admitted to the bar, and I take 
it for granted that if he preaches at all among the negroes it is for the purpose of fur- 
thering his fraudulent schemes. He is without doubt a crook of the first water. 
He sustains this reputation among those who know him, and the fact that he was 
employed by Ballinger, Lindly & Rodkey as one of their chief organizex's and operators 
proves to me the character of the work contemplated by them. 

My understanding is that William H. Vann has been admitted to practice before 
the courts of the State as an attorney, and has resided around Nowata and Sapulpa, 
Okla., for some years. He is regarded as a shrewd, scheming negro. 

Nelson Grubbs, another negro, whose post-office address is probably Nowata, Okla., 
has operated more or less in connection with Vann. 

In every locality in wliicli I have made any inquiry touching the operations of 
Ballinger, Lindly & Rodkey I have found that one or more scheming negroes have 
been employed to herd the applicants for the evident purpose of sending them into 
Muskogee to be fleeced by Durant and Vann. The evidence gathered by me tends 
to show that both Durant and Vann have collected various sums of money from the 
persons seeking enrollment, the indications being that they have obtained all the 
money that it was possible for them to induce the various persons to part with. 

A number of persons have sworn that Mr. Lindly and Mr. Rodkey both represented 
themselves as Government officials, and practically every person interviewed by me 
who has had any dealing with these individuals states that Durant, Vann, Grubbs, 
and others associated with them, openly represented themselves to be in the Govern- 
ment service, stating in that connection that the rolls of the Five Tribes have been 
open ed . 

I here quote from the statements of several Ballinger claimants and some of their 
witnesses, made before me, whose complete testimony I do not believe It is necessary 
to attach, for the purpose of this report. I first quote from the statement of Jennie 
Wilson, a negro, of Tulsa, Okla., made before me November 18, 1915, who applies for 
enrollment, through Mr. Ballinger, as a Choctaw citizen by blood, as follows: 

■'Q. Before whom did you make this application for enrollment?— A. Perry 
Rodkey. 

'•Q. Where does Perry Rodkev live? — A. His office at that time at Okmulgee 
(Okemah?). 

"Q. Do you know whether Perry Rodkey is employed by Webster Ballinger, an 
attorney of Washington, D. C? — A. Yes, sir; I suppose so — -from Washington. I 
don't know who he was under. 

"Q. Webster Ballinger — ^is that the name Mr. Rodkey gave you as the name of the 
person by whom he was employed? — A. lie didn't give me any name. He said he 
was working for the Government; heard him speaking— — • 

"Q. Is that what Mr. Rodkey told you? — A. I heard him say that. 

"Q. Did he tell you that?— A. I don't know that he was talking to me. I heard 
him talking to some other person. 

"At Okemah?— A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. You went to see him at Okemah?— A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. WJiat did he state to these other persons, using the exact language that he 
used concerning his being employed by the Government? — ^.\. Well, I couldn't state 
it and be correct about it. lie was just talking about enrolling Indian blood rights 
* * * working for the Government. 

"Q. Did he tell you he was in the employ of any particular department of the 
Government?— A. IvTo, sir. 



68 INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL, imi. 

■'Q. Any particular bureau of the Government? — -A. No, sir. 

"Q. The Department of the Interior, Indian Office? — A. No, sir; I didn't hear him 
say that. 

"Q. Led you to believe that he was working for the Government. — A. Yes, sir. 

'■Q. You believed that when you made this application? — A. That was my under- 
standing. 

" Q. Did you have to pay him any money? — 'A. No, sir; not a cent. 

"Q. Did he tlemand any money?— A. No, sir. 

"Q. Did you deal with him direct? — A. Yes, sir. 

'■Q. Deal with any other person? — A. No, sir; took my statement himself. 

'■ Q. Did he write it himself on the typewriter? — A. No, sir; had some one. 

"Q. Man or woman? — A. Man. 

"Q. Do you know the name of the man?— A. Mr. Guthrie. 

*'Q. Your petition for enrollment filed by Webster Ballinger appears to have been 
sworn to before Chas. E. Guthrie on March 12, 1915. This is the application that you 
refer to?— A. Yes; that's it. 

'■Q. Did you pay Mr. Guthrie? — A. No; only the notary fee. 

•'Q. How" much?— A. $3. 

"Q. What was this .|3 for? — A. Notary seal on my application and my children's. 
******* 

" Q. Did you sign any kind of a contract to pay them anything ?^ — -A. No, sir. 

'■ Q. Did you give them any power of attorney ?^ — A. I don't know how papers were 
fixed up. I didn't sign any papers to pay. 

"Q. You understand that the rolls are closed? — ^A. Closed? 

"Q. Yes. — A. Years ago. 

"Q. Do you understand that they have been reopened? — A. Well, yes: open to 
enroll Indian blood rights. 

"Q. Who gave you to understand that the rolls have been reopened".' Who has 
given you that understanding? — A. Where I was trying to be enrolled." 

I quote now from the testimony of Graham W. Wilson, a negro notary public of 
Tulsa, Okla., the husband of Jennie Wilson, from whose testimony I have just quoted: 

"Q. Who approached you in the matter of the enrollment of your wife's children 
and herself? How much did you pay for the work done in her behalf? — A. Mr. Rod- 
key came here to Tulsa first. A crowd of us went then to Muskogee where we imder- 
stood that Mr. Rodkey was located. I took my wife along. After we got there we 
found that Mr. Rodkey was sick, so we couldn't see him. Wejwent to the office where 
we understood he was located and found Mr. Lindly. Mr. Lindly told us to state 
our case to a colored man named Durant — Nelson Durant. Nelson Durant told me 
that he would have to have S;35. That for $35 he would put my wife and children on 
the rolls. I told him that I had a letter from Mr. Rodkey in which he stated that 
there would be no charge. I told him we would wait and see Mr. Rodkey, and, if 
necessary, go to Okemah to see him; later we went to Okemah. We did not pay Mr. 
Rodkey anything, but paid the notary public a few dollars, I have forgotten the exact 
amount we paid for the notary's work and typewriting. " ' 

I quote now from the statement of Mary Ross, a negro citizen of Haskell, Okla. 
(made before P. J. Hurley, Choctaw national attorney, Nov. 23, 1915), in the matter 
of her application for enrollment as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

"Q. \\hen you came over here to Muskogee whom did you see in Muskogee? — ^A. 
I came to that office. 

"Q. In this building?— ^A. I suppose so. 

"Q. Were you led to believe they were enrolling people? — A. I asked and they 
said they were. 

"Q. That they were enrolling people? — A. Yes, sir; I asked for Ballinger and Lee 
and Lee was gone and Ballinger was in Washington, D. C, and they were hired by the 
Interior but this man that was doing this writing, he told me he was hired and was 
getting a salary to enroll people, and this colored man 

"Q. Did this man tell you he w^as hired by the Secretary' of the Interior? — A. Yee, 
sir; his duty was to enroll the applicants. 

''Q. Did he tell you whether or not he could take any fees for his services? — A. He 
would'nt take a penny; was being paid by the Government. 

"Q. Who was the colored man? — A. Nelson Durant. That is the man I gave the 
monev to. 

"Ql What money?— A. The $5. 

"Q. How much did he ask for?— A. .$25. 

"Q. What was the reason? — A. He was charging. I asked him how come him to 
charge, and he said these witnesses. I wouldn't pay him a cent, so I says. I went 
back and stalled him. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 69 

"Q. You did pay Nelson Durant $5? — A. Yes, sir; and I paid $1.75 to a little 
bitty fellow. 

"Q. AVhat is he, a notary public? — A. Yes, sir. 

******* 

'■Q. What did Nelson Durant say that you should pay this money for? — A. He said 
do you think I am up here for my health, and takes a book and hunts your relatives, 
and he writes who I am and who my people are, and he carries this thing in on a 
piece of paper. 

"Q. Whose office? — A. Stout man's. 

******* 

"Q. Will you send me those letters you claim to have received from Ballinger? — 
A. Yes, sir; I will hunt them all up, lots of them are postal cards. He told me the 
roll was open. 

'■Q. How long ago has it been? — A. Not very long. 

"Q. Has it been six months since he wrote you? — A. Said he would let me know 
and for me to keep up and see when the roll, the Choctaw rolls were open. 

■'Q. ^Mren was that? — A. A good while ago. 

'•Q. These men that took your application, what office of the Interior Department 
did they say they represented, the Secretary of the Interior, the Commissioner of 
Indian Affairs, or the Superintendent of the Five Civilized Tribes? — A. The Secre- 
tary of the Interior. They told me Choctaws and Creeks and Cliickasaws and there 
was a Creek and a Chickasaw Indian there, Susan Harrison enrolled her child the 
same day I was enrolled and another woman from the Cherokee Nation the same day 
and there was four of us. there was six enrolled there that day. 

••Q. Did those people claim they were authorized by the Government to enroll 
those people? — A. This white man told me he was getting a salary from the Govern- 
ment to enroll the people, he wouldn't take any money from them. I never offered 
him any. He sat in front of the table. The old man, both of them talked so plain, 
I was getting the value of the land in money. I told them I didn't care for the land 
I would take anything. I ^vill set up the "cigars and he says Mrs. Rose I wouldn't 
take a penny from you or anybody I ever saw to do this work because the Government 
has me hired. I am getting my salary from Washington. D. C. I said if I was to get 
any money I wouldn't mind setting them up. 

••Q. That was in Ballinger's office? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. The colored man was Nelson Durant? — A. Yes, sir. 

•Q. Who was the white man doing the speaking? — A. He didn't say what his name 
was. He was a big fat man, not as tall but hea\'ier than you are. I think it was 
Judge Lindly; he told me he was raised in the Choctaw Nation. 

"Q. Did he say that he was from McAlester? — A. Yes, sir; South McAlester. 
******* 

"A. I did not think it was fraudulent by them coming out so public but if it had 
been in a private place I wouldn't have wanted to see about it, but I was told by lots 
of people that these was in this offic'c. A public place, a fine place ]:)efore a crowd of 
people. I never thought about it being a fraud. If I am prosecuted for anything 
I can hold this man and this colored man who carried me into this office and this 
white man copied off of this piece paper and puts it on two piece of paper. He keeps 
one. they keep one. This colored man writes in this room out of a book, then he 
cairies it in there. He claims he finds your relatives on the roll and all I swore to is 
that my mother said that the Folsoms was my people and the Flaxes were her people. 
I was born after my father died. 

■■Q. You would not have gone before these people if you had not thought them 
officers of the United States? — A. Sure, 1 wouldn't have paid tlie colored man $5. 
I wouldn't have paid them the $15 but my mind did not feel right. After I had con- 
soled him and told him I would send in §15, I talked to several lawyers and they said 
he was a grand rascal, had been to the pen, and that Lee had run off for some cause." 

Doss Buffington, a negro citizen of Muskogee, Okla., who made application through 
Mr. Ballinger for the enrollment of himself as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw 
Nation, testified before me on August 5, l!)15. in part, as follows: 

"Q. Tell me what coTinectiou you had with the jhtsous operating in an office on 
the second floor of this building. Doss. — A. You mean those commissioners down 
tlicrc? 

"(^ Do you c'ull them conuuissioners?— A. Yes, sir; that is what they said. 
■Q. From what .source did you learn that this was a coninu.'<sion?-A . 1 learned 
it from William Thomp.son and Will Moore. Old man William Thompson wanted 
to. be one of my witnesses, 1)ut I had two other fellows and 1 did not take him. 

■ "Q. I have conversed with you about your connection with these ])er.'!ons down here 
and you have told me. as I und(>rstan(l it. that you were approached on the street V)y 



70 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

William Thompson, a colonul man, who told you that some persons located in this 
building were enrolling persons who had been left off of the rolls; that they were 
GoA'ernment men sent here for that purpose, and that you accompanied William 
Thompson to that office, which is located in the Metropolitan Building in which the 
Indian agency is located, and, as I understand yoii. you found Nelson Durant. You 
know him? — A. Yes. sir. 

''Q. He is a colored man?^ — -A. Yes; sir. 

■'Q. Nelson Durant told you that you would have to get some money l)efore he 
could talk to you? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. How much?— A. $15. 

"Q. Was this before you stated your case to him?- A. Yes, sir. I had to do that 
before they would hear me at all. 

■*Q. Before you stated your case? — -A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. You went off then to get the money? — -A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Did Nelson tell you he was in the Government service?- A. That he waa 
working for them. 

"Q. That he was working for white men? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. And that they were in the Government service?^ — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Did he tell you their names?- — A. Rodkey and Lindly. 

"Q. Do you know the given name of Rodkey or Lindly?- — A. No, sir. 

"Q. You say you went off and got the $15?— A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. And vou came back that night? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Who with?— A. Will Thompson. 

"Q. Did ho say he was working for these people too? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. You came back to the office of these persons that night about 8 o'clock and 
you found Will Thompson, Nelson Durant, and Will Moore there?— A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Will Moore a colored man?- — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. William Thompson?— A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. What occurred there? — A. After I went in Nelson wanted to know if I had the 
money and I said yes, I was ready, and he said we would get to work and do business, 
and he called me in another dark room back there and I gave him the $15. 

"Q. And you went in alone?- — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. And the room was dark?— A. Yes, sir; there was no light in that room. 

"Q. You paid him the $15 in that little room?- — A. Yes, s'r. 

"Q. What else occiirred?— A. They then took up my case. They questioned me 
then. 

"Q. Who questioned you?— A. Mr. Lindly. 

"Q. Did Nelson Durant take you in Lindly's office?— A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Had you met Mr. Lindly before? — A. Yes, sir; I met him that day. 

"Q. What did Mr. Lindly tell you that day? — A. He didn't talk to me any that 
day much; he told me they were sent there by the Government, something like that, 
to look after people who were left off of the roll. 

"Q. Mr. Lindly told you that?— A. Yes, sir; he says you will have to pay your 
witnesses and notary fees. He told me I would have to do that before anything else 
took place. 

"Q. You are positive that he told you he was sent there by the Government?— 
A. Well, Mr. Lindly he told me that. He says to me, I don't want a penny of your 
money; 1 am getting paid for taking up these petitions. 

" Q. After you went in Lindly's office with Nelson Durant what cocurred?— ^A. They 
went to writing my affidavit up. 

"Q. Who (juestioned you?— A. Mr. Lindly. 

"Q. Did Nelson Durant question you?- — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Well, did Mr. Lindly write your answers down?— A. Yes, sir; he had a notary. 

"Q. Well, who was writing?— A. Mr. Lindly. 

"Q. You are of negro blood? — A. Yes, sir. 

******* 

"Q. Whereis Will Moore now?— A. I don't know where he is; he is dodging around. 

"Q. What is he dodging?— A. He got into some trouble. I don't know what he 
got into. 

"Q. Are the officers after him? — A. Yes, sir; something about some mortgage. 

"Q. Have you talked to others on the outside about the work that is being done 
down stairs here?— A. Yes, sir; I have talked to several folks and they all seem to 
think it wasn't much good. 

"Q. I think yoii told me not long ago that these people thought it v^m^ the Govern- 
ment that was doing this? — A. Well, they did think so. 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 191*7. 71 

"Q. You talked to persons on the outside who thought it was the Governmeut? — 
A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. A number of persons? — A. Yes, sir." 

Mary Reeves, a negro resident of Vian, Okla., who is an applicant for enrollment 
through Mr. Ballinger, as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation, testified before 
me on August 6, 1915, in part, as follows: 

"Q. T\Tiom did yoii go to see about making this application for enrollment? — A^ 
Mr. Lindly; that is who I make application to. 

''Q. Where is Mr. Lindly located?— A. On the second floor of this building. 

* * ■ * * * * * 

"Q. Is Mr. Lindly in the Governmeut service? — A. Yes, sir; I reckon so. 

■'Q. Do you know what position he occupies?^A. All I know is that he made oufc 
my application. 

"Q. AATiat makes you believe he is in the Government service? — A. I 'lowed by 
that, I didn't think he would make out my papers if he wasn't." 

John Harrison, a negro resident of Keefeton, Okla., who has applied for enrollment 
through IVIr. Webster IBallinger, as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation, testi- 
fied before me on August 10, 1915, in part, as follows: 

"Q. How did you happen to go to Mr. Lindly's office to make application for enrolT- 
ment?- — A. I just heard of him being here for that pm'pose from other people, ao F 
just went. 

"Q. WTiat was told you, exactly, about his business? — A. Well, I don't know, sir; 
I can't tell you. 

"Q. Were you told that he was in the Government service? — A. I don't kno'vr 
whether he was in the Government service or not. 

"Q. WTiat was your belief about it when you went to him? Did you go to himr 
under the impression that he was a Government man? — A. Yes, sir; I think that is 
what I understood. 

"Q. You understood that before you went to him?— A. Yes, sir. 

'*Q. Did he give you to understand that he was in the Government service? — A. f 
never asked him." 

Elizabeth Sexton, a negro, of Tulsa, Okla., who has applied for enrollment as a 
citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation, through Mr. Ballinger, testified before me 
on November 19, 1915, in part, as follows: 

"Q. Before whom did you file your application for enrollment? — A. Before whont 
did I 

"Q. Yes.— A. You mean the notary? 

"Q. Yes, and the person with whom you filed your application.' — A. The man that 
was working for him — I could call his name if I heard it. For Mr. Rodkey^ 

"Q. Mr. Rodkey?— A. Mr. Perry Rodkey. 

"Q. Lives in Okemah? — A. I don't know where he lives. 

"Q. His office is at Okemah? — A. Yes. 

"Q. WTiere cUd you see him? — A. Here in Tulsa, and one of his met- 

"Q. Did Mr. Rodkey represent to you that he was in the employ of the Govern- 
ment. — A. I guess so. 

"Q. Did Mr. Rodkey state to you himself that he was in the employ of the Govern- 
ment? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. He told you himself?- A. There was another man working for him— 

"Q. Did Mr. Rodney tell you himself that he was in the Governmeut ser\ice? — A. 
Yes, sir. 

"Q. ^^^lat language did he use in telling you that he was in the Government serv- 
ice?- — A. He said he was — the Government had him seeing after the Indians and 
their claims — that was his business. 

"Q. You say that ho had some one working ior him? — A. Another man. I would 
know his name, but can't call it. 

"Q. Guthrie? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. ('harles E. Guthrie?- — A. Yes, sir; white man, tall and slender. 

"Q. You swore to this application before Mr. (Juthrie?- A. No, sir; Wilson was 
there to, the notary. 

* * ih * * * * 

"Q. Did you have any conversation with Mr. Guthrie concerning whether he was 
in the Government ser"\dce? — A. I heard that there was a man here. I went on the 
train to see Mr. Rodkey. 

"Q. Did you have any conversation with Mr. Guthrie?— A. No more than what I 
asked him. I asked him if he was in the Government service. 

"Q. He did n(jt say that he rcj)ros< nted the Government, or Interior Department,, 
or any bureau of the Government, did he? — A. No, sir, he said he was working for 
Mr. Rodkey; that he was one of the men that Mr. Rodkey put out to help him. 



72 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL^ 1917. 

"Q. Did he say that Mr. Rodkey was in the (Joveinment service? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Did Mr. Rodkey himself told you that he was in the Government service? — 
A. Yes, sir. 

■Q. Did he say what department or bureau he was working under? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. He said that he was in the Indian service? — A. Yes, sir; I went to Muskogee 
fo see him. So many people there I couldn't see him long. Don't talk to him but 
a little bit. Wanted me to meet him in Okemah. I couldn't never go down there. 

"Q. You understand that the rolls were closed in 1907?- — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Has it been represented to you that the rolls have been reopened? — A. Heard 
they w'ere reopened and I coinmenced trying. 

'■Q. \Mio told you?- — A. I couldn't specify the person. Heard it from different 
ones — different ones talking about it. 

" Q. Did a good many colored people here in Tulsa go before those persons at Musko- 
gee and Okemah?- — A. 1 don't know sir. Just know one woman that went to 
Okemah. There ain't two dozen here that I know. 

"Q. Your understanding was that these persons that were taking these applica- 
tions were in the Government service? — A. Yes, sir." 

Charley Willard, a negro of Tulsa, Okla., made an aftidavit in the enrollment case 
of the claimant whose testimony has just been quoted from, and I secured his state- 
ment, from which I quote below. (I understand that this man acted, to some extent, 
as an agent for those persons in Tulsa, working Anth G. W. Wilson, a negro notary 
public) : 

"Q. You applied for enrollment before these people who were getting up these 
applications? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. "\Miom did you apply for enrollment before? — A. I went to Muskogee to see 
these people. 

"Q. ^^^len you went down to Muskogee to see these people I suppose you had an 
inter\dew with them. \Miere were these people located, these people you went to 
see about your application? — A. Up in a big building, where the Dawes Commission is. 
On the second floor. 

"Q. You found many others there? — A. Office crowded. 

■■Q. Mostly colored? — A. Yes; colored and Indian mixed, white and half-breeds. 

"Q. Who did you talk to down there?— A. I applied— I talked to Mr. Perry Rodkey 
and Mr. Lindly. Asked was it sure enough true, ^^'as the roll open for these people. 
I went down one day to see about it, then I went about two weeks later. Asked his 
price. Xelson wanted $5 himself. 

"Q. Nelson Durant the man you refer to? — A. Yes, sir. He got up all the state- 
ments. Mr. Lindly did the tjpewriting. I told these people I didn't want to pay — 
I told these people I heard the rolls were open, but I didn't want to pay 

''(.}. How much did Nelson want? — A. §10. and he said that was for notary fees 

•Q. You understand Nelson Durant is a lawyer? — A. Yes, sir. 

■■Q. What did you understand about Mr. Rodkey and Mr. Lindly's positions? — 
A. \\ hy, Mr. Rodkey said he was working for the United States. Mr. Lindly he was 
not charging anything. 

"Q. Did Mr. Lindly say that? — A. Said Government paying him in these citizen 
cases. 

"Q. Was that the general understanding? — A. Yes, sir. 

•■Q. With those with whom you talked? — A. Yes, sir. 

''Q. You did not pay them anything yourself? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Did you pay Nelson Durant anything? — A. $2 and paid the notary $1.75. 

"Q. They wanted $10? — A. I didn't have it and I wouldn't pay it. 

"Q. How much did you pay Nelson? — A. $2 and notary §1.75; §3.75. They asked 
me for the rest of the money. 

"Q. You applied for the enrollment of yourself as a Creek by blood? — A. Yes, sir; 
and my children. Some of them are on, one dead child not on. 

"Q. You are trying to get on the blood roll? — A. Yes, sir. I got the deeds down 
there for two of them." 

Jane Driver, a negro woman, of Tulsa, Okla., who has made application through 
Mr. Webster Ballinger for enrollment as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation, 
testified before me on November 17, 1915, in part, as follows: 

"Q. You told me that you paid Alec .Xail §2.50 for making an affidavit? — A. Yes. sir. 

"Q. And another colored man §2.25 for making an affidaAdt? — A. Yes, sir. 

•'Q. Was his name Wel)ster Burton?— A. I couldn't tell you. 

"Q. Then you paid the notary §2? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. And you paid the man who took you down to Muskogee, Chas. Willard, §2 and 
his fare to Muskogee and retiu-n? — A. Yes. sir." 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, 1917. 73 

W. H. Short, a white citizen of Morris, Oklu., appeared in my otiice on Avitjust 3, 
1915, and upon beinj? advised by him that his wife, Lillie Short, nee Cornelius, had 
applied through Mr. Ballinger for enrollment as a citizen by blood of the Creek Na- 
tion, I obtained a sworn statement from him, from which £ ijuote below: 

■■Q. Now, who approached you in this business — who first came 1o you and told you 
aboiit this enrolling business? — A. The Bakeis. 

■'Q. Where do they live? — A. Morris. 

"Q. Are they Indians? — A. Yes, sir; claim to be. 

"Q. What did they say to you, exactly? — -A. They told me — 1 don't recall just tlie 
words — they told me a man named Durant was seeing about this business and that 
they were going to see him about it, so I came with tliem. 

"Q. Did you see Durant? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Where did you find him? — ^A. I found him on the second floor of this building. 

"Q. In the back office? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Did you get acquainted with anyone else coiyiected with that office? — A. 
There was another gentleman in there . 

•'Q. Do you know his name? — A. I knew it then, but Cjan't call it now. 

"Q. Was his name Lindly? — A. Yes, sir; Lindly was the name. 

"Q. Did you get acquainted with any other person connected with that office? — • 
A. No, sir; I didn't. 

"Q. Do you know whether Mr. Webster Ballinger is connected with that office? — 
A. Yes, sir, I think he was. 

"Q. In what capacity? — A. I do not know; it seems to me like all the papers were 
made to Webster Ballinger. 

''Q. Wliom did you talk to first? — A. Durant. 

■'Q. What did i)iu-ant represent to you that he was doing? — A. Why he claimed 
that he was working for the Indians and trying to prove their rights. 

"Q. Did he represent himself to be in the Government service? — A. Well, f won't 
say for siu"e, l)ut I believe he did. 

"Q. Do you know what language he used to give vou that impression? — A. No, sir; 
I don't. 

"Q. You can't say what he stated to you exactly? — A. No, sir; I can't. 

"Q. Did these Bakers that told you about these people state to you whether they 
were in the Government service or employ? — A. I believe they did; I think that 
Baker told me the Government had them em])loyed. 

■'Q. What kind of a contract did you make with Durant — any? — A. No, there was 
no contract to it. When I first came down here I paid him $5 to go over the rolls 
and he said that was all he could do then, but to come back and when I came back 
next time — a week from that date — I brought my wife and he took me to one side and 
said: ' I am ready for business if you have the money, but we can't do anything if you 
can not pay for it, as we have to go out to the Dawes Commission upstairs and get 
some stuff and it will cost you $25.' I told him times were mighty hard and it looks 
like I am paying out money for something I dou"t know anything about. I ])aid him 
$20, and lie fooled around and got the papers hxed uj) and got a notary to sign them. 

"Q. How much did you pay the notary public? -A. It seems to me that I paid the 
notary public $2.50, making $27.50 I was out. 

"Q. Is that all you have paid out?- — A. .Yes, sir. 

■■Q. Did either you or your wife sign any powers of attorney or any kind of a cmi- 
tract in Mr. Ballinger's office? — A. No, sir; not that I know of. 

"Q. Or any other place? — A. No, sir." 

On the same day the above statement was lakeu I obtained the statement of Mr. 
J. ^^'. Sutton, a white citizen of Morris, Okla., who appeared at my office with W. II. 
Short, from whose testimony I have just quoted. 1 quote from Mr. Sutton's test inumy 
as follows: 

'Q. IIow did you happen to accompany Mr. Short here?— A. Well, he heard of 
this commission, and others had heard of it and told us. Our neighbor, Mr. Baker, 
told us, and I came to try and assist him. 

■'Q. You say you heard something about liiis in the neighborhood?- A. He did 
from Mr. Baker-- that is the first I heard of it; ImU we didn't believe it. 

•Q. You didn't believe what? — A. We didn't believe it was a legal transaction, 
for tlie rolls had been clo.sed. 

'Q. And as it came to you, what impression did it make on your mind; was it 
that (rovernmeiit officials were enrolling persons? — A. No, sir; it never did come to 
mind that way. I told him it was a fraud, until I came (lowu here and talked with 
them in this l)uilding, and I was then satisfied, for I thought it was the Dawes Com- 
mission. 



74 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

"Q. It l)eiiig riglil in the building with the Indian oflice, you thought if it wasn't 
right it would be stopped? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. If there Avas any fraud, it would be stopped? — A. Yes, sir; I thought it was 
all right, as I thouglit it was in the Dawes Commission house, and I supposed then that 
there was something to it. 

'■Q. From what you had previously heard in your neighborhood, did you get 
the impression from persons in the neighborhood that the Government was enrolling 
persons? — A. Yes, sir; that is the way they talked — that is the way I understood it. 
That it was a legal affair by the Government, who was enrolling these persons that was 
left off, and as this girl is a niece of my wife, and is an Indian, and we could prove 
it 

"Q. Was there anytliing that occurred in the office of these persons that made you 
suspicious of their connection with the Government service? — A. Yes, sir. 

'■Q. What was it, exactly? — A. Well, they had some colored fellows there thatAvere 
very ignorant, and they offered to be witnesses for people, and came to me and told 
me, or offered to help me, and I told them we already had all the help we wanted. 

"Q. Did they want pay for their services? — A. I suppose they did; I told them 
we had all the evidence we wanted. 

■■ Q. Do you know any persons who have paid any money to these men on the second 
floor of this building? — A. Yes, sir; Mr. Short. 

"Q. Do you know any other person? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Who? — A. One of my boys paid some money. 

"Q. What is his name?- — A. Jimmy — J. D. Sutton. 

"Q. Where does he live? — A. Morris. 

"Q. How much did your son pay? — A. $5. 

"Q. Who did he pay that to? — A. I supjjose he gave it to his wife. His wife is 
one of the Baker family. My son paid his wife's part. My son married a Baker. 

"Q. What amount did the other members of the Baker family pay?— A. They paid 
$5 a head, and these men sent out for $5 more the other day. 

" Q. Do you know whether that was paid?— A. Yes, sir; they sent it to them. They 
sent if a few days ago; it was for another Avitness; old grandpa Baker sent it to them. 

"Q. What is his name?— A. I don't know. Old grandpa Baker is all I know. He 
is an old man. 

''Q. All of these people you speak of, are they Indians?— A. Well, my son is an In- 
dian, and those others claim to be Indians but have not proved it^this Baker family." 

The testimony of Mr. W. H. Short, referred to above, shows that his wife was not a 
resident of the Creek Nation on June 28, 1898. 

James Goings, a negro citizen of Depew, Okla., who has applied for enrollment, 
through Mr. Webster Ballinger, as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation, testified 
before me on November 19, 1915, in part, as follows: 

"Q. What did Gould represent to you? Did he represent that the rolls were 
open?- — A. No, sir; he didn't represent to me that they were opened. 

"Q. What did he tell you about it?— A. He told me after I was telling him about 
a^he was reading in his papers and he said 'Jim, this roll is going to be open. Seems 
* * * since you said, * * * i have been reading where these rolls are go- 
going to— —' 

"Q. You went to Muskogee?- — A. Yes, sir. 

■'Q. Who did you see?— A. Mr. Lindly. 

"Q. See anyone else?— A. No, sir. There was a gentleman in the office, but I can't 
phu'C him. 

'■(^ What did Mr. Lindly tell you? — A. He told me that I would have to employ an 
attorney to investigate. 

'Q. Did he suggest some attorney to you?^ — A. I asked him who was attorney there, 
and he said there was two or three around there, and about that time in walked Nelson 
Durant and I employed Nelson Durant. 

"Q. What sort of a contrart did you make with Nelsou Durant?^A. I was to pay 
him cash in hand. I wys to pay him $27. He said he would look up the book. He 
would charge $27. 

"(J. Did you pay him the money?— A. Yes, sir; $27. 

"Q. Pay him that day? — A. No, sir. After I was down there and he told me \a 
t)ring those five grown children. 

"Q. Did you pay him anything at all the first time?— A. $7.50. 

'■Q. Forwhat purpose did you pay him this $7. 50? — A. He claimed he had to go and 
li)ok up the books. 

"Q. You ]Kiid him $7.50 to look up (he books?- — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. What books was he to look up? — A . I don't know, sir. He didn't tell me par- 
ticularlv what books. 



INDIAN APPKOPKIATION BILL^ l!»n. 75 

"Q. You gave him $7.50 in cash?^-A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. First time yon were down there?- A. Yes, sir. 

■'Q. When was that?- A. Aloni,' in February. 

■'Q. Of this year? — A. Yes, sir. 

■'Q. Any one witness you pacing him tliat money?- A. No, sir; there was nobody 
in the oflice but me and him at that time. 

"Q. Did he giA'e you a receipt for it? — A. Yes, sir; but J haven't it here. 

"Q. You have the receipt at home?— A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. He said to come back again with your five children? - A. Grown children. 

"Q. You took them back?^A. Yes, sir. 

•'Q. \\Tien did he tell you about bringing more money down? — A. He said all those 
grown ones would have to pay $5 apiece for entering fees. What he said 

■'Q. You went down there afterwards and took your five grown children with you? — 
A. Yes, sir. 

■■Q. Did each of these children take money along with them? — A. No, sir. 

•'Q. They didn't give any money? — A. I got the money myself. 

■'Q. Had he told you that you would have to bring some more money? — A. $1 
more; $17.50 for me." 

" Q. Did you take him thai $10? You gave him that $10? — A. Yes, sir. 

■Q. How much more? — A. $5 apiece for the children. 

•Q. How much in all?~A.' $25. 

■'Q. Gave him $25 for the children?— A. Yes, sir. 

■■Q. They paid you the money to give to him? -A. All but one. That was Birdie, 
She was living with me and 1 pay hers. 

''Q. How much did this make in all that you paid Durant? — A. $10, $17.50, and $25. 
Let's see, $42.50 in all. Would be $42.50 near as I could come to it. 

■'Q. Did you get any receipt for the money? — A. I got a receipt for myself for 
$17.50. He told me he would send all the receipts of the kids — their receipts. 

''Q. Do you know whether he did this? — A. No, sir; I don't. 

■'Q. Did you have any understanding as to whether Mr. Lindly or this man Durant 
were in the Government serA-ice? — A. I understood that Mr. Lindly was in the 
Government service. 

"Q. Who told you that Mr. Lindly was in the Government service? — A. He told 
me himself. He was working for the Government and he was not allowed to charge 
any fees. If Government knew he charged any fees he would be hoisted from the 
office. 

"Q. He told you that himself? — A. Yes, sir. 

■'Q. Anyone else present when he told you?- A. Yes, sir; I think if I make no mis- 
take there was an old man Nails. 

■Q. Alec Nails?— A. Yes, sir; if 1 make no mistake think he was in there at the 
time. 

"Q. What did Durant tell you? He tell you he was in the Government service? — 
A. He said he was attorney looking up the cases like for myself. 

"Q. What did he tell you about Lindly? — A. He sa'd he would look up my case 
and if it was agreement with Mr. Lindly — whatever Mr. Lindly said when he looked 
it up — when he looked it up he would turn it over to Mr. Lindly. 

"Q. Do you know whether Mr. Webster Lallinger, of Washington, D. (\, was con- 
nected with that office? — A. I heard he was after I went in. 

******* 

■'Q. What did Alec Nail charge you for making an affidavit for you? — A. $5. 

"Q. You jiaid that independent of the other money you paid to Durant?— A. Yes, 
sir. 

"Q. You gave $5 to Alec Nail?— A. Yes, sir. 

•'Q. Hand it to Alec Xail? -A. Ye.s, air. 

* 4: ■ :J: :); :(: * * 

■'Q. Did tiould tell you that tho.se i)ersons were in the Goveruincni ser\ice? — A. He 
told me that Mr. Lindiy was." 

Mollie Nathan, a reliable old colored citizen of P(trter, Okla., who has applied for 
enrollment as a citizen of the Creek Nation, through Mr. Ballinger, on August 27, 1915, 
testified, in part, before Judge II. (\ Allen, national attorney for the Greek Nation, as 
follows: 

"Q. Who told you they were enrolling people? — A. Mr. Howard, Emmett Howard. 

"Q. Who is he?— A. He keeps the post office; he used to be a banker. 



7t) INDIA>; APPKOPKIATION BIJ.L, lUH. 

"Q. He is the postmaster there now? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. What did he tell you about it? — -A. He said the rolls is open now and you 

ought to try again and see what you can do. 

******* 

"Q. After you talked to Mr. Howard you came down to Muskogee? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Who brought you here? — A. Well, I came on the train, but several came with 
me. 

'•Q. Who came with you? — A. Nellie Hawkins and Morris Steven. 

■'Q. Where did you first meet Nelson Durant? — A. Right here at this place. 

"Q. Had you known him before? — A. No, sir. 

'■Q. What did he tell you? — A. He got the book and hunted up iny people and 
found them right now ; no trouble to find them. My mother was a half sister to Jane 
Doleman; she is dead now. 

"Q. She is on the roll? — A. Yes, sir; she is on the roll all right. 

"Q. Now, then, what did he tell you about enrolling you? — A. Well, he said he 
didn't see nothing in the world to hinder me from getting my right. 

"Q. Did he say they were enrolling people? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. What did he tell you about Mr. Ballinger? — ^A. Didn't tell me anything about 
Ballinger. He said how much money I must get. and I went back and told Mr. 
Harsha about it, and he said, 'Aunt Mollie, watch your business, and don't let them 
beat you, you too old,' and I told him what they said it would take to pay. Ballinger 
said it would take some more witnesses, and so I came and ask for you, then, and they 
said you wasn't in, and so I went back home then and see Mr. Harsha and got the 
money. 

"Q. Did they tell you they were representing the Government? — A. No, sir. 

'•Q. AMiat did they say? — A. Well, sir, Mr. Allen, I couldn't tell you all they said. 
Mr. Ballinger said this, and now I am telling you the truth. Judge, Mr. Ballinger — 
I don't know whether he is the man that got the money or not, I am telling the truth, 
but I know Mr. Ballinger told me this, 'Now, when you get out of here they will ask 
what I charged, and you tell them what I charged you. You say you haven't paid 
me a cent, "and if you don't get nothing I don't get nothing.' 

"Q. Did he tell you Durant was working for him? — A. Well, Durant presented 
these names. Durant hunted up the names and brought the book in. 

"Q. Where was Durant when he told you you had to raise the $50? — A. In the first 
little room. 

"Q. Before you saw Mr. Ballinger? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Did you talk to Mr. Ballinger about the $50? — A. No. sir; I never opened my 
lips to him about that; I don't know why I didn't, and Morris told him who I was and 
who my people was. 

"Q. When was it you paid this money to Durant? — A. In March, when T enrolled, 
when Mr. Ballinger "did this printing work. 

"Q. The first time you came down here you didn't get enrolled because you didn't 
have the money? — A. No, sir; just hunted up the papers, and Durant told me I 
would have to have that money. 

'•Q. How much money on the 5th of March did you give Durant? — A. $20, and 
then I went and got the children just as quick as I could. 

"Q. .\ few (lays later?- -A. Yes, sir; and then I gave hini $l(i.50 again, and now 
wait, that ain't all. and they k<'])ton sending me cards 1 had to get all, and I went and 
got him and brought him in and he said 'Mamma, from what 1 read in the papers it 
might l)e all right, Imt if you see Judge Allen he can tell you,' and I said I couldn't 
find you and in a few days I seen in the papers you was gone to Washington. Let's 
see- -that's $8f>.50 isn't it' and then 1 was out $4 more. 

•■'Q. Did you give that $4 to Durant? — A. My son did. 

'Q. Your son gave it to Durant? — A. Yes. sir. 

'•Q. That is $40.50 you ga\e in all?- A. Yes, sir. 

"'Q. Where did you get this uioney?- A . I borroweil it iroui Mr. Harsha. luul I have 
gut to work now and pay the interest. 

■'Q. What })ecame of the other $9.50? — A. Going back antl forward. 1 had to go 
clean to Viau for one of the children. 

******* 

"Q. You pai<l all of the expenses of all of your witnesses here yourself? — A. Yes, 
.sir. 

■'Q. You paid their expenses yourself?- A. That's what Diu'ant said it was for. 

"Q. He didn't pay your expenses, did he?- -A. No. sir: 1 paid my own. 



IXDIAX APPTiOPEIATTOX RILL, 1017. 77 

"Q. Ho didn'l pa\ your childivn's expense^?- -A. No. sir. 

■'Q. Or their rhildreu's expenses? — A. No, sir. 

■'Q. You paid that in addition to the money you paid Durant? — A. That's where 
that $50 went. 1 i)aid all the expenses of myself and my children and their children 
in addition to what I paid Nelson Durant. 

■'Q. What witnesses was he supjiosed to pay out of that $40.50?- A. He was suppo.«ed 
to pay Herryhill and James. 

* -X- -1^ -X- ^ ■- -;<■ 

■Q. You go in there and tell those people you liorrowed tliis money from the hank 
and that you borrowed it because you believed they had the power to enroll you and 
get you an allotment, and that yon have found out they haven't got that power and 
you want your money Iiack. I would't go to Durant, I would go to the head of the 
othee and tell them what is going on. You go to Mr. Lindley and tell him 1 sent you 
to him and told you 1 l)elieved if you would go to him he would give you your money 
back that you have given them to get on these rolls. Do that and then come back 
and let me know what they say. (Witness leaves the room to go to the office of Mr." 
i^allinger, and returns with Mr. lindley and says that he is the man she referred to 
in her testimony as Mr. Ballinger.)" (Mr. Lindley states that he will take this matter 
up with Nelson Durant.) 

The testimony of the abo\e claimant shows that she was taken from the Creek 
Nation when she was an infant, which was before the Civil War. and that she did not 
return to .said nation until after (he rolls of the Five Civilized Tribes were closed. 

I quote from the statement made before me by Liddie Stevens, n^e Alexander, a 
negro woman of Tulsa. Okla.. on November 20. 1915, she being an applicant for enroll- 
ment through Mr. Ballinger as a citizen by l)lood of the Creek Nation, as follows: 

''I gained the impression somehow that Mr. Rodkey was in the Government service. 
* * * Mr. Lindley merely told me in Muskogee that he was representing Mr. 
Rodkey, but told me that I would have to have a lawyer to make out my papers for 
nie. and he referred me to Nelson Durant. a colored man, who came into ^Ir.Lindley'e 
office. Mr. Lindley advised me that this man Durant was a lawyer and would make 
up my paper for me. J consulted Durant there in Mr. Lindly's office, but Mr. Lindly 
made out all the papers and asked me all the neccvssary questions. Durant didn't 
<luestion me at all and did not make out any papers in connection with my case, to 
my knowledge. Durant told me that he charged me $3 for representing me in the 
matter and I paid him $3 in cash there in Mr. lindly's office at Muskogee during the 
time 1 was there. 1 paid Mr. Lindly $1.50, but I do not know what that was for. 1 
paid a notary pul)lic, named (Tolden, $1.50, which I understood was for notary fees. 
My witness at Muskogee was Tobe Berryhill, whom I found in Mr. I>indly's office. I 
j>aid him 50 cents for making an affidavit for me." 

I quote now from the testimony of Tennessee Ricketts, a negro resident of Tulsa, 
Okla., given before Choctaw National Attorney Hurley on November 27, 1915. She 
is an applicant for enrollment, through Mr. Ballinger, as a Choctaw citizen by blood : 

"Q. How much did you pay the man who took this petition? Who prepared this 
petition? — A. He charged me for A\Titing $3 or $3.50. 

"Q. Where did you make this petition? — A. Okemah. 

"Q. What was the man's name? — A. Perry Rodkey. 

''Q. Did he tell you who he represented? Who Perry Rodkey represented? — 
A. He told me he was working for the Indian Affairs. 

"Q. For the Government? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Did he say he represented the Secretary of the Interior?— A. I don't know. 
He told me he wasn't to charge nothing for it. Somebody at Washington had him 
doing this way. 

"Q. Did you understand that the Government was paying him? — A. I don't know, 
lie told me he wasn't to charge me nothing for it, only for the typewriting. I don't 
know whether he told me the Government or not. He told me he was working for 
Indian Affairs. 

"Q. P^or the Commissioner of Indian Affairs? — A. I guess so. He told me Indian 
Affairs. 

"Q. You paid him $3?- A. For the typewriting. 

"Q. Who did you give the $3 to?- A' I don't know what his name was. I gave it 
to the typewriter, $3. 

"Q. Who was present when he told you he was working for the Commieeioner of 
Indian Affairs? — A. His typewriter was there. 

"Q. Was the typewriter a man or a woman?— A. Man. 



78 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

•'Q. Was your (kughter there?- A. All my children -wu? there. All but one, 
in Texas. 

■Q. Where did you first hear about Perry Rodkey? — A. Did you understand that 
he was enrolling people? — A. When I first heard of it. She heard of it somewhere. 
She heard about it somewhere, and I wrote. He told me he wasn't em-olling. He 
said he was sending up petitions. When we went down there he said he wasn't en- 
rolling, just sending up a petition to ask for the names to be put on." 

Amy Barnes, a negro woman, of Henryetta, Okla., testified before me on Decem- 
ber 1, 1915, in part as follows: 

■'Sometime during the fall of 1914 my son-in-law, Floyd (Jrayson, who had just 
returned from the town of Henryetta, advised me that he had learned that day that 
there was an Indian agent in Henryetta enrolling persons who had been left off the 
rolls by the Dawes Commission. I went into town the next day and_ went around 
to see these persons who were said to be enrolling people. I found the place crowded 
with colored people and Indian folks. I talked with the heavy-set gray-haired man 
who seemed to be in charge of the business, but I can not recall his name. This 
stout gray-haired man whom I talked with the first day told me that they had been 
sent out by the Indian agent in Muskogee for the purpose of enrolling those who had 
been left off of the rolls by the Dawes Commission. I am satisfied that he told me this. 
It seemed to be the understanding of every one with whom T talked that these persons 
were in the Government service." 

I ciuote from the testimony of Floyd Grayson, the son-in-law of the above-named 
woman, as follows: 

' ' I accompanied my mother-in-law the next day to town and went around with her 
to see the persons said to be enrolling people. There was a big crowd in the offices 
waiting to see them, Indians and colored folks. I went in with, my mother-in-law and 
my sister-in-law, Missouri Sanders, went along also. We talked with a heavy-set, 
gray-haired white man. I think that he had a little gray mustache. (This answers 
the description of Mr. Mat M. Lindly. W. L. B.) I do not know whether the man's 
name was Lindly. I swear positively that he told my mother-in-law in my presence 
that the Indian agent at Muskogee had he and the athers that were with him out 
enrolling the persons that had been left off by the Dawes Commission." 

Charlie Gould, a white man who resides near Depew, Okla., was employed by 
Ballinger, Lidly & Rodkey as a field worker, and 1 quote below from testimony 
taken by William H. Reynolds, field clerk of Atoka, Okla., in November, 1915, con- 
cerning the representations made by this man, which shows that this man endeavored 
to obtain money upon the representation that he was working iinder persons who were 
employed by the Government. 

"Q. Your name is D. S. Newton? — A. Yes. 

"Q. Your residence is at Ada, Okla.? — A. Yes, sir. 

•'Q. Did you know Charlie Gould? — A. No; I never met him before. 

•'Q. He introduced himself when he called on you, did he? — A. Yes. 

•'Q. For what purpose did he come to visit you? — A. Well, he come and ask me if I 
was eligible for enrollment, and if so if I would like to get on the roll, and I said I was 
and would like to be placed on the roll. 

" Q. Did he make overtures to you that he could enroll you? — A. No; he did not say, 
but he said that there was a man in Muskogee that was placing the names on the roll. 

•' Q. Did he make any effort to get any money from you? — A. No. 
•Q. Did he say to you that the other party would charge you anything? — A. Yes; 
that the other party would charge me S50. 

"Q. Did he tell you who this party was that was in Muskogee? — A. He did. 

"Q. After telling you who this party was did you call this party up?— A. No; I 
wrote him, but never have heard from him. 

'Q. Who was that party, Mr. Newton? — A. I don't remember his name. 
•Q. Was it Mr. L. M. Lindley?-~A. I believe that was his name. 

••Q. You wrcte Mr. I>indley,"then? — A. Yes. 

•■Q. You have not heard from Mr. Lindley? — A. No. 

"'Q. Did Charlie Gould represent to you that he was a Government em})loyee? — A. 
No: he said this fellow Lindley was an employee of the Government, and said Lindley 
was sent from Washington. 

"Q. He led you to believe that in his conversation that Lindley was a Government 
employee and "that he was working under Lindley? — A. Yes." 

I quote now from the testimony of Jim McFarland, a resident of Ada, Okla.: 
•Q. Do you know one Charlie Gould? — A. Yes. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 79 

■'Q How long have you known Charlie Gould? — A. I have known Charlie Gould 
for the last 15 years. I lived by him for about six years. 

"Q. Do you remember meeting Charlie Gould in the last two or three weeks? — A. 
1 met him wdthin the last two or three weeks. 

■'Q. You had a conversation with Charlie Gould at that time, did you? — A. Yes; 
two or three different times while he was here. 

•'Q. Did he make any overtures to you to enroll your wife?— A. He did not get 
right out and tell me at the time, but from his talk it appeared to me that he would try 
to get her on the roll and said she can't get no land; but he said she could get the 
money, and this matter would have to be done between Friday and Monday. 

■ ' Q. Did he want to make any charges for the services? — A . He didn't say he would 
charge me anything, but he said to me that I would have to have $50; he said it would 
be of no use of me going — her father could take her. 

■'Q. Did he represent himself to you that he was a Government employee? — A. 
Well, I don't think he put himself as a representative of the dejjartment, but he was 
working for some man in i\fuscogee. 

•'Q. Did he lead you to believe that the party he was working for was working for 
the Government? — A. Yes. 

■'Q. He talked with you several times about enrolling your wife? — A. Yes." 

I quote now from the testimony of Lon Wormington, a resident of Ada, Okla.: 

■'Q. Who introduced you to Charlie Gould? — A. He introduced himself. 

"Q. For what purpose did Charlie Gould form your acquaintance? — A. To get my 
wife enrolled, he said. 

■ ' Q. What overtures did he make to you in reference to getting your wife enrolled?— 
A. He said just pay $50 and go to Muskogee, and that there is another party there 
would enroll. He said it was through this party that they would have to be put on 
the roll. 

"Q. Did he give you that gentleman's name? — A. No. 

"Q. What further conversation did he have with you as to the enrolling, after you 
have paid him $50? — A. He didn't say only just said that he would enroll them, was 
all, and that they would draw the money something like $2,000 or $3,000. 

"Q. Did you pay him $50?— A. No, sir. 

"Q. Did he say to you he was in the employ of the Government? — A. He said this 
other party was. 

"Q. The other man was in the ernploy of the department? — A. Yes. 

"Q. Did he give you the other party's name? — A. No, sir. 

■'Q. Did he say as to what branch of the Government the other party was working 
under? — A. No; he did not; he just said he did not know. 

"Q. Did he tell you that tliis other party was in the Metropolitan Building at 
Muskogee? — ^A. I don't believe he said what building he was in; 1 know he didn't. 

"Q. I'll ask you if by the conversation you had with Charlie Gould that you were 
led to believe that he was in the employ of the department? — A. Yea." 

I quote now from the testimony of M. B. Lewis, a resident of Ada, Okla.: 

"Q. Do you know one Charlie Gould? — A. I would know him, I think, if 1 see him 
again. 

"Q. Who approached vou in reference to enrolling you on Chickasaw roll?— A. 
Yes, for $50. 

"Q. When did he tell you that the roll would be opened or closed?— A. Well, he 
did not say anything about opening roll, but he said that the rolls will be closed oa 
Saturday, but he would hold them until Monday. 

■X- * * * -x- * * 

" Q. Did he represent liimself to be an employee of the United States Government? — 
A. r won't say, but he represented himself that he was a partner of this man in Mus- 
kogee, who sent him out to get the people enrolled. 

"Q. Did he lead you to believe that in his conversation that he was a Govern- 
ment employee?— A. Yes; he said that he was sent down there by the Government 
to get the people on the roll." 

Manna Bruner, a negro resident of Rentiesville, Okla., heretofore referred to, was 
at first one of Ballinger, Lindly & Rodkey's principal field workers, but later, after 
some of his operations were investigated by Field Clerk H. M. Tidwell, of this ofJice, 
he seems to have dropped out of this line of work. He is of a criminal type, and the 
chief of police of Muskogee stated to me, a few days ago, that Bruner had been in 



80 IXDTAX APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

jail a iminbor of time?, if not in tlic penitentiary, and that he belonged to the criminal 
f'lass. 1 ()Uote from a letter dated December 1(5, 1914, from Charles V. Pyle, land 
appraiser of tl)is office, as follows: 

"Mr. Mattison says Manny Bruner is a 'plausible nigger,' has an impressive way, 
and is very convincing in his statements to colored folks, and with his positive guar- 
anty that he will have them enrolled and secure an allotment or the money equiv- 
alent, has got a great deal of money. Informant gave me the names of several per- 
sons, one white man, who he knew had been defrauded. * * * The witnesses 
are scattered. * * * It is said that Bruner is well known in Muskogee and 
Eufaula, as he has (h)ne terms in both comity jails. Mrs. H. O. Frederick, Renties- 
\-illo, Okla., also the wife of tlie station agent, both colored, and John Smith, white, 
<'hecotah, are among the victimized." 

I quote now from an affidavit of Will Smith, of Mclntosli County, and made before 
J, A, Hurl, a notary public, on January 27, J 9 15: 

"I hereby state on oath that during the early fall of 1914 one Manny Bruner came 
to me and offered to place my wife, Mattie Smith, and my children, Sus'e, Cohmibus, 
and Joiney Smith, upon the Cherokee roll of Indians for the siim of $10. He also 
stated that he would place me on the same roll, but I told him I was a white man. 
He stated positively that he would and could place my wife and children on the 
above-referred-to roll and that they would receive money in lieu of land. I paid him 
So and afterwards paid Pleas Guest $1 for him, making a total of $6. I have never 
heard from him since that time." 

Several months ago complaint was made to the Indian Office direct concerning 
the organization of a society among the colored citizens in the vicinity of Vinita, 
Okla., it being alleged that William H. Vann and Nelson Grubbs were the organizers. 
The complaint was referred by our department to the Attorney General's office and 
reached the United States attorney for the eastern district of Oklahoma, who in turn 
referred the complaint to our office for further investigation. It will be noted that 
Vann and Grubbs are both referred to heretofore herein as field workers of Ballin- 
ger, Lindley, and Rodkey. Testimony shows that these men organized a so-called 
Cherokee Freedmen's Association and collected initiation fees and monthly dues, 
incidentally getting what additional money they coidd from the members to prose- 
cute applications for enrollment for them. I quote below from sworn statements of 
a few of the victims given before Field Clerk McCay, of Vinita, Okla., in October, 
1915. Calvin Ross, a citizen of Vinita, Okla., testified, in part, as follows: 

■'Q. Have you ever heard of an organization known as a Cherokee Freedman Asso- 
ciation? — A. Yes. 

■'Q. Do you know Nelson Grubbs? — A. Yes. 

■Q. Do you know Willie Vann? — A. Yes; I know him when I see him, but I am 
not acquainted with him . 

■'Q. Nelson Cirubbs and Willie Vann were organizers of this association, were they 
not? — A. I do not know whether they were or not — I think that was their business. 

■'Q. Did you pay any money to anyone? — A. Yes. 

••Q. Whom did you pay it to? — A. Paid it to AVillie Vann. 

"Q. How much did you pay him?— A. I paid him $1, Willie \'ann, and my two 
daughters paid him 75 cents each. 

•Q. What is your daughters' names? — A. Ottie Ross, the other name Minnie Ross. 

•Q. Nelson Grubbs and Willie Vann told you, did they not, that if you paid them 
this money they would get you on the freedman roll and would get you some land? — 
A . They did ; land or money. 

"Q. Did these two men say to you that they were in the services of the United 
States Government? — A. They told me that they had been authorized by two law- 
yers to get those names and send them in. 

••Q. Did they tell you the lawyers were working for the Government? — A. Yes. 

"Q. Now, were those lawyers' names BalUnger, Rodkey, and Lindly? — A. Yes. 

■Q. You paid this money into the hands of William Vann? — A. Yes. 

'■Q. The reason you paid this money to William Vann was because they represented 
to you they were Government men, and that they were working with the above firm 
of attorneys, who were also Government men, and in consideration of your paying 
them this money they would get you on the rolls and get land or money for you, is that 
the way it waa? — A. Yee, sir." 

I quote now from the testimony of Willie Pack, of Vinita, Okla.. given before 
Mr. McCay: 

'Q. Do you know Nelson Grubbp? — A. Yes, sir; I do. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL^ 1917. 81 

"Q. Have you ever heard of an organization known as a Cherokee Freedman's 
Association? — A. Yes. 

" Q. Nelson Grubbs and William Vann were organizers of this association, were they 
not? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Did that association meet at Island Church? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Did these people represent to you that if you would pay them for their work 
they would get you on the rolls and get you some land ?^ — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Did you pay them any money? — A. Yes, sir; I did. 

" Q. How much money, in your opinion, did you pay them? — A. Me and my mother 
together paid them about $300 or $400. 

"Q. Whom did you pay this money to? — A. To Nelson Grubbs and this other man, 
William Vann. 

"Q. Did Nelson Grubbs and William "Vann tell you that they were connected with 
the Government of the United States? — A. Yes, sir; they did. 

"Q. What did they say about this? — A. He said if we paid them money and signed 
up papers that they would get us on the rolls and get our land. 

"Q. Did these men tell you that they were hired by the Government?^ — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Did you ever hear of a firm of attorneys by the firm name of Ballinger, Lindly 
& Rodkey? — A. Yes, sir; they were the ones who were going to put us on the rolls. 

"Q. Did Nelson Grubbs and William Vann say that the above firm of lawyers were 
also Government men? — A. Yes. They said they were Government men. 

" Q. You paid this money into the hands of Nelson Grubbs? — A. Yes, sir; I sure did. 

"Q. And the reason that you paid this money to William Vann and Nelson Grubbs 
was because they represented to you that they were Government men and that they 
were working with the above firm of attorneys who were also Government men, and 
in consideration of you paying them this money that they would get you on the rolls 
and get land for you, is that the way it was? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Do you know of any one else who heard these men tell you they were in the 
Government service? — A. Yes, sir; but I can't call their names now." 

I have read letters written by both Mr. Lindly and Mr. Ballinger in which they 
referred to the work of this Cherokee Freedmen Association, showing that they are 
interested in that organization . I have been unable to investigate further the workings 
of thia association. 

William H. Vann, however, has operated apparently most of the time independent 
of any connection with this association. I now quote from a letter, the original of 
which is in my hands, which was addressed by William H. Vann, and is in his own 
handwriting, to W. W. Grayson, of Laredo, Tex., xuider date of August 31, 1915: 

" I am ivorken with the U. S. department in the enrollen of those citizen children that 
did not get any lands so you see / am next to all kinds of business now if you don't want 
this money you must say so in your letter to me then I will report the facks to the 
Department then they can do the next thing. * * * i will also put Charlie on 
the roll and he will draw $2,080.00 in money, as he didn't get any land. Write me to 
507 E. Hobson, Sapulpa, Oklahoma." (The underscoring is my own. W. L. B.) 

I quote now from the testimony of W. M. Ingram, a white man, a resident of Sapulpa, 
Okla., given before Field Clerk ('. A. Stevens on November 27, 1915: 

"Q. You claim that parties have approached you relative to getting you enrolled 
in the Cherokee Nation? — A. Yes a party by the name of Vann who is described as fol- 
lows: 'A mixed breed, has one foot crooked, five feet seven, weighs a1)out 250, wears 
a black mustache, is dark colored. He told me to come to Muskogee and he would 
have the witnesses down there. He told me that I had a deadshot case. That I 
should raise $40 and bring it to Muskogee. I did not go to Muskogee for the reason 
that I talked to several parties aixd they advi-sed that he was a fraud. 

" Q. Do you know of any other parties who claim to |be representing the United 
States Govenxment enrolling parties in either the Creek or ('lierokee Nations? — A. 
No one but this fellow at Bristow by the name of (iuel (Gould) . I don't know whether 
he ever received any money to place parties on the roll. He didn't exactly tell hne 
he was an agent of the United States Government, but from the way he talked he led 
me to believe that he was working for the United States (ioverumont." 

Mattie E. Farrar, a young colored woman, a resident of Muskogee, ( )kla., a])p('ared in 
my office on December 10, 1915, and alleged tliat lier father, Austin Farrar, of Okmul- 
gee, Okla., had paid William Vann $50 upon an a])pli(alioTi for enrollment made by 
him as a Freedman. She states further tliat Vann wanted ?50 more and tliat her father 
had promised to pay him the additional $50. It appears from tliis woman's statements 

25134— PT 4r-lQ 6 



82 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

to me that her father has neither legal nor equitable title to enrollment as a Freed- 
man. 

I am satisfied that powers of attorney were obtained by Ballinger and Lindly from 
all the persons whose applications they prepared, to Mr. Ballinger. However, as none 
of the applicants whom I ciuestionecl seemed to recall that they had signed such a 
paper, I am inclined to believe that they signed such powers of attorney without 
knowing what they were signing, practically all of them being illiterate persons. I 
attach hereto a copy of a power of attorney, the original of which I have m my files. 
(See Exhibit L.) 

Considering the testimony I have quoted herein in connection with section 17 of 
the appropriation act approved August 1, 1914, which is set out below, it appears to 
me that this law has been openly and wantonly violated by the persons working for 
Mr. Ballinger in Oklahoma: 

"Sec. 17. Unless the consent of the United States shall have previously been 
given, all contracts made with any person, or persons, now or hereafter applicants for 
enrollment as citizens in the Five Civilized Tribes for compensation for services in 
relation thereto, are hereby declared to be void and of no effect, and the collection or 
receipt of any moneys from any such applicants for citizenship shall constitute an 
offense against the laws of the United States, pimishable by a fine of not exceeding 
$500 or imprisonment for not exceeding six months, or both * * *." (See act 
of Congress, approved Aug. 1, 1914.) 

It is probable that further investigation of the operations of these persons in Okla- 
homa would result in the gathering of a vast amoimt of cumulative evidence covering 
the points touched on in the excerpts of testimony set out in this report. 

If it were not a fact that these men have worked among ignorant, unintelligent 
persons whose testimony in a court of record would be weak, little trouble would be 
experienced in securing numberless indictments against a dozen or more of Mr. 
Ballinger's assistants and field workers in the State of Oklahoma for conspiring to 
defraud, impersonation of Government officers, and for violation of section 17 of the 
act of August 1, 1914, referred to above. 

Several months ago our department referred complaints against William H. Vann 
and Nelson Grubl)s to the Department of Justice with a view of bringing criminal 
action against these persons if they were found to have \iolated any law. The United 
States district attorney subsequently requested this office to make further investiga- 
tion of their operations, and the matter was referred to me with verbal instructions to 
cooperate with the United States attorney's office. I am presenting to him at this 
time the evidence referred to herein showing that these individuals have imperson- 
ated Government officers for the purpose of defrauding the persons to whom such false 
representation was made, and further that they have violated section 17 of the appro- 
priation act approved August 1, 1914. Incidentally, I believe that it would be 
advisable to take up with the United States attorney's office the question of the 
sufficiency of the evidence herein referred to upon which to base criminal action under 
the United States statute against Nelson Durant and Manna Bruner. The Federal 
grand jury meets in Muskogee in January next, and if the United States attorney's 
office deems criminal action warranted by the facts the evidence can be presented 
to the grand jury at that time. 

Under the United States statute covering the offense the false personation of a 
Government officer must be coupled with the intent to defraud the Governmert of the 
United States or some individual. Although the evidence referred to herein tends 
*o show that both Perry Rodkey and Mat M. Lindly have represented themselves as 
{government officers, yet it is evident that they have studiously avoided the accept- 
ance of any money directly from the applicants. 

As most of the evidence referred to herein was gathered by me during the time I 
was working under the direction of Hon. P. J. Hurley, Choctaw national attorney, 
I suggest that he be furnished a copy of this report for his Information. 

I recommend the reference of this report to the honorable Commissioner of Indian 
Affairs for his advice in the premises. 
Sincerely, yours, 

Wm. L. Bowie, 
(Detailed) Special Investigator. 



INDIAN APPKOPEIATION 5ILL, 191'7. 83' 

Webstee Ballinger, Attorney at Law, 
Rooms 245-6-7 Metropolitan Building 

Okemah, Okla., March 22, 1915. 
Mrs. LiDDi Stevens, 

Tulsa, Okla. 
Dear Madam: I have not heard from you for a long time. We are ready now for 
you to make your application for enrollment. We have been writing up applica- 
tions at our office at Muskogee all winter. Let me know at once where you are, and 
if you are ready to make your application. I am at home at Okemah now, and will 
be here for a couple of weeks. Write me at this place. Hoping to hear from you 
soon, I am, 

Yours truly, 

Perry Rodkey. 
(Exhibit A.) 

Department op the Interior, 
United States Indian Service, 
Local Field Representative, Five Civilized Tribes, 

Okemah, Okla., August 19, 1915. 
Mr. Wm. L. Bowie, 

Special Investigator, 

Muskogee, Okla. 
Dear Sir: In answer to your of the 6th relative to the operations of Perry Rodkey 
and M. M. Lindley will say that I am not well acquainted with Mr. Lindley, as I 
only met him some time ago when he was over here assisting Mr. Rodkey in the 
enrollment of missed allottee or getting powers of attorney signed to have them 
enrolled; then they were working in the office adjoining mine. Mr. Rodkey is here 
now and still in the same business; he informed me yesterday when I met him on 
the street here that he had instructions to work Creek County, as there were about 
400 allottee that were missed and entitled to enrollment, and that he expected to 
work at it next, and would have some of them brought over to Welty, near the county 
line, and go up there certain days and meet them in a bunch and get it fixed up. 
I have never heard Mr. Rodkey represent that they were connected with or were 
Government officers or employees, but said they were being assisted greatly by Mr. 
Allen's office, the national attorney, as they were close together at Muskogee, and 
when the parties came over there part of them were taken care of in his office, and they 
were also being assisted by the office of the Five Civilized Tribes, and the depart- 
ment knew and approved of what they were doing. I have never heard of them asking 
a fee or taking any money for their work, the only cost to the citizens being 25 cent8 
for notary fee for taking the acknowledgment for signing the powers of attorney. 
As to Nelson Durant, I am not acquainted with and do not know at all. Mr. Rodkey 
has nothing here only his home, and that is heavily encumbered, and in fact until 
he went to work for Webster Ballinger he was in a very bad way financially, but I 
understand he is getting his expenses paid while doing this work, and will get a good 
bonus when Ballinger gets his commission. I do not know of Rodkey being a grafter, 
as he has nothing, and never had much, although he has been here ever since this 
town started, and never was able to accumulate much. I have heard that he has 
been used as a tool for some of the grafters some long time ago. Mr. Rodkey is living 
here, and is in town at present. He has no office here, but is working some time in 
the office of Charles E. Guthrie and Z. J. Thompson, of Okemah. 
Respectfully, 

(Signed) Harry B. Seddicum, 

Government Farmer. 
(Exhibit B.) 



84 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

Department of the Interior, 

United States Indian Service, 
Local Field Representative, Five Civilized Tribes, 

Hugo, Okla., August 7, 1915. 
Mr. Wm. L. Bowie, 

Special Investigator, Muskogee, Okla. 
My Dear Mr. Bowie: Receipt is acknowledged of your letter of August 6, 1915, 
relative to one Mat. M. Lindley, formerly of McAlester and now of Muskogee, Okla. 
In reply, beg to advise that I have been acquainted with Mr. Lindley for about 12 
years, and I knew his relatives, who are a rather prominent family in Illinois, before 
I came to this country. 

For some five or six years before statehood Mr. Lindley was an office deputy in the 
office of the United States marshal for the central district of Indian Territory. Since 
statehood he has been practicing "at" law in McAlester until recently. His law 
business was very meager, and I believe the bulk of his clients were Indians. I 
never knew of his doing anything particularly "raw," or if I ever heard of anything 
I do not at this time recall it. 

He has not been entirely sober or out from under the influence of liquor for several 
years, at least that is my impression, because I don't think I ever got near him that 
the smell of liquor was not arOund him. 

I think he has been associated with Webster Ballinger for several years, and, if I 
remember correctly, he appeared before Judge Pollack, of the department, when he 
was in Oklahoma looking up allottees who had been left off the rolls. 

T. B. Latham, W. R. Harris, W. P. Freeman, or Georga Miller, all former United 
States officials in the central district, and all of McAlester, could perhaps give you 
more definite information. They are all reliable and prominent men. 
With best wishes, I remain. 
Sincerely, yours, 

(Signed) S. G. Brink, 

Supervising Field Clerk. 
(Exhibit C.) 

Department of the Interior, 
United States Indian Service, 
Local Field Representative, Five Civilized Tribes, 

McAlester, Okla., August 14, 1915. 
Mr. Wm. L. Bowie, 

Special Investigator, Muskogee, Okla. 
My Dear Mr. Bowie: Receipt is acknowledged of yoiu" letter of the 6th instant, 
requesting certain information relative to the history of Mat M. Lindley; also photo- 
graphs, thumb prints, descriptions, etc., of Nelson Durant, William M. James, and 
William Thompson. 

In reply thereto beg to state that I have interviewed three business men of thia 
city relative to the standing of Mat M. Lindley, and in each their reply was practically 
the same: "That his standing in the city of McAlester is very low." I am not per- 
sonally acquainted with Mr. Lindley, but from what I have been able to learn about 
him he is a man that is addicted to the excessive use of intoxicants, and will some- 
times stoop pretty low for a few dollars, and has been engaged to some extent in 
"grafting" among the Indians. 

There is also inclosed photographs of Nelson Durant and William M. James; also 
thumb prints of the latter, together with description of Willie Thompson, who, I pre- 
sume, is the same as the William Thompson described in your letter. 

Trusting this is the information sought, and regretting the delay in obtaining same, 
as the photographs had to be taken, and William James is a trusty out on the farm, 
thereby difficult to see him, I am, 
Respectfully, 

(Signed) R. L. Allen, Field Clerk. 

(Exhibit D.) 




Nelson Durant, No. 803. Oltlahoma State Penitentiary, McAlester, Okla. Age, 44; black. 

Received March 9, 1909. Sentence, 3 years. Crime, false pretense. From Muskogee County. 

Height, .5 feet 4\ inches. Went out "on expiration pardon, August 27, 1911. 

(Exhibit E.) 





->- 




^ 












^^ 



^> 












-< 












Z .-r, S CD > C 

C ^ 0) C K - 
'X (t ; - a ~ 



I.CVV 






^ 



-^ 






^ 03 b' t 

T - An=Q 

<E -. IC, 

>■ 3 

-' - ^ 

= < = 
rt> 



^ 






& 









(Exhibit F. 



Ben (Jravson, No. 173!i 




Willuuu James, No. 60S7. Okhilioma .Slate Peiiiteiiliary, McAlesler, Okla. Age ti4; Ijlai-k. 
Term, li years. From Muskogee County. Received Oklahoma State Penitentiary August 
i. 1915. "Crime, false personation. Height, 5 feet 7| inches. 

(Exhibit G.) 




William Thompson, Xo. (iiW'J. Oklahoma State Penitentiary, McAlesici, okla Scnleiucil 
.Tulv 2:1, 1915. Term, 3^, years. County, Tulsa. Crime, forgery. .Vge, .■)(1. Hair, lilack. 
Eyesdeep maroon. Complexion, dark" brown. Weight, 151. IJuild, medium. Xativily, 
Oklahoma. Occupation, farmer. Remarks: Depre.s.sed-cut scar one-fourth inch to right 
outer corner right eye. oblong-cut scar three-fourths inch above right eyebrow at center 
forehead. 

(Exhibit n.) 




Wik'V Mrlllln h 

l'915. Tfiiii, . 

(Exhibit I.) 



lii:.':.'. oklahoiiia Siaic I'cnil eiitiary, McAlester, Okla. Sentenced Oftol)er, 
From Muskof^ec CuuiUy. Crime, obtaining money under false jjretense. 



(Exhibit K.) 




INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 85 

Department of the Interior, 
Office of the Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes, 

Muskogee, Okla., July 31, 1915. 

In the matter of the enrollment of various persons as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. 

Alec Nail, being first duly sworn by William L. Bowie, deputy clerk of the United 
States Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma, on oath testifies as follows: 

Examination by William L. Bowie on behalf of the Superintendent of the Five 
Civilized Tribes: 

Q. WTiat is your name? — A. Alec Nail. 

Q. Your age? — A. I am going on 73. 

Q. ^\^lere do you live? — A. Here. 

Q. ^Vhere were you born? — A. I was born 4 miles south of Doaksville, Tex. 

Q. Are you on the rolls of any of the Indian tribes?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. WTiich tribe?— A. Choctaw. 

Q. Freedman? — A. I am. 

Q. What is your roll number? — A. I don't know, sir; I can't read. 

Q. Well, how long did you live south of Doaksville? — A. Well, the old people 
claimed when we moved to Blue I was 11 years old. 

Q. ^\^lere do you mean when you say you moved to Blue? — A. A creek. 

Q. You were 11 years old when you moved to Blue?^A. Yes, sir. 

Q. ^^^lat is the name of the post office? — A. There was none where I lived. 

Q. WTiat is the nearest post office now?^ — A. Caddo. 

Q. How far from Caddo did you live? — A. Old Caddo has become a railroad sta- 
tion — 6 miles. 

Q. How long did you live on Blue? — A. Until I became grown. I was 22 when 
they surrendered . 

Q. Was you living on Blue then? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How "long did you stay on Blue after that? — A. I think I stayed with theold 
boss about one year, and I left and came to Boggy Depot, about 15 miles on this side. 

Q. How long "did you live at Boggy Depot? — A. Up until last November. 

Q. Then you came to Muskogee? — A. Yes, sir; I came to Muskogee last November. 

Q. And lived in Muskogee up until this date? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. ^\'hat is your occupation? — A. I ain't able to do nothing now. 

Q. What have you been doing since you have been in Muskogee? — A. I ain't done 
anything. 1 liked to died last summer and if it had not been for Mrs. Hester, Senator 
Owen's mother-in-law 

Q. Well, have you made any money at all since you reached Muskogee? — A. None 
to amount to anything. 

Q. Have you made any? — A. Some time when I witness for people down here they 
give me a $1, and sometimes $1.50. 

Q. \\'hat people do you refer to that paid you this money? — A. Those that claim, 
those that make application for enrollment for citizenship. 

Q. Where is that office located? — A. In the Metropolitan Building. 

Q. Do you know the number of the room? — A. No, sir; I would know it if I was look- 
ing at it. Rodkey, Lindly & iiallinger-was printed on the door of the office. 

Q. The Metropolitan Building is the building that the Indian Agency is in? — A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. \\ho first talked to you, Alec, about acting as a witness down in that ofiice? — A. 
Well, I couldn't positively say now; I think the fellow that hunted me was Jackson 
Barrett. He claimed to be a nephew of old man William Johnson, Gov. Johnson, he 
was governor for a while. 

Q. Well, what did Jackson say to you? — A. He asked me if I knew William Johnson 
and his children, and 1 said 1 did, and he said he was a son. 1 told him I knew Silas 
and Tommy; Tommy ran for governor 

Q. He asked you to act as a witness for him? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did he see you? — A. Down in town, on the street somewhere. 

Q. He brought you uj) to Ballinger's office? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you acted as a ^^itne.'^s for him? — \. Yes, .sir. 

Q. You signed an affidavit? — A. Yes, sir, I witnessed for Jackson's family. 

Q. Did you sign an affidavit down there for Jackson Hariett? — A. I guess ao. 

Q. Who did you make that affidavit before? — ^A. Golden. 

Q. Where is Mi . (iolden's office? — A. Down on the first floor of this building. 

Q. The Metropolitan Building? — .\. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did you get for making this affidavit for Jackson Barrett? — A. Got a dollar, 

Q. Who paid you the dollar?- -.\. Jackson. 

Q. Were you promised any additional sum of money if this claim of Jackeon's went 
through?— A. No, sir; he said he would never forget me. 



S6 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL^ 1917. 

Q. He said if he got on he would remember you, did he?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You have acted as a witness for a number of people since that time, have you 
not? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you remember the names of some of those persons for whom you signed 
affidavits?— A. No, sir; I don't believe I do, but if you have some of the cases I done 
witnesses, I would know 

Q. Do you know any of these persons that you signed affidavits for? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you personally acquainted with them? — A. No, sir; I don't be lieve I was. 

Q. You merely accepted their statement as true, what they told you concerning 
their parentage?— A. I didn't consider their statement, they would say they were kin 
to William Johnson 

Q. Did you believe what they told you, or not? — A. I have just thought about that. 

Q. You had no other reason except their own statement to believe they were children 
of Choctaws? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know Mr. Ballinger? — A. I never seen him. 

Q. Who occupies the office down there? — A. Nelson Durant and Judge Lindly, he 
typewrote whatever is down- — — 

Q. Any other person?- — A. Mr. Golden, he swears the people in. 

Q. What did Mr. Lindly do exactly? — A. He typewrote, and would go in the room 
where the colored lawyer was. 

Q. Would Durant write it down with a pencil? — A. I guess so. 

Q. And would hand it over to Lindly and Lindly would write it out lumself on the 
typewriter? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were these affidavits read over to these persons before they signed them? — A. 
Well the majority of the time they were, at least mine were. 

Q. Your affidavits were read over to you?— A. I suppose they were, I can't read. 

Q. They pretended to?— A. They had me thinking so. 

Q. You say you never saw Mr. Ballinger? — A. No, sir. 

Q. He has never been down here since you have been with them?— A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know who rents or pays for this office?— A. I reckon Mr. Lindly. 

Q. What connection did Mr. Ballinger have with the office? — A. I don't know. 
The way I understand is that they claim that is Ballinger's work and that Rodkey 
and Lindly was working for him. I don't know whether that is true or not. 

Q. Do you know whether Mr. Ballinger is connected with the Government serv- 
ice? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know? — A. No, sir. 

Q. What is your understanding in regard to that matter? — A. Well, the way I under- 
stand it is that he Is in Washington to present this evidence before Congress by power 
of attorney. 

Q. You understand that he has power of attorney? — A. That is what they said. 

Q. Do you know whether Mr. Lindly or Mr. Rodkey are in the Gbvernment serv- 
ice? — A. No, sir; I don't know; I am unable to say. 

Q. Were you told by any person that they were in the Government service? — A. No, 
sir. 

Q. Did you ever tell any person they were in the Government service? — A. I 
couldn't because I don't know; I didn't believe they were though. My reason for 
that is that it was not Government business. I had my children read the papers, and 
I couldn't see it from the papers. 

Q. Did you hear any person say they were in the Government service? — A. No, sir, 
I don't think I have. 

Q. Did not all of these applicants or claimants think they were in the Government 
Service? — A. I am not positive about that, but it is likely to believe that they were in 
the Government service for he would not take any pay for what he did, Mr. Lindly. 

Q. You think he was in the Government service? — A. Yes, sir; I hear him say you 
could not pay him .?1,000, and if the Government did not have him someone did. 

Q. You say, though, that you heard others say he was in the Government service?^ 
A. W^ell, probably I have; I couldn't be certain about that. 

Q. Did any of these applicants say anything to you that led you to believe they 
thought these men were connected with the Government service? — A. Well, I might 
have. The way they said — it was supposed he was a Government man by him telling 
the applicants he would not take pay. I thought so, for I don't see how in the world 
he could live and not take pay unless the Government was supporting him. 

Q. These persons connected with the office in question did not pay you anything, 
did they?— A. No, sir; never gave me a nickel. What all I got I got from the people 
I witnesses for. 

Q. Have you done iny other work since you have been in Muskogee, since Novem- 
ber? — A. No. sir. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 8-7 

Q. When did you first come up to this office and act as a witness? — A.' I don't know 
whether the latter part of the winter or the first of the spring. 

Q. Did you sign these affidavits by thumb mark? — A. Yes, sir; I had to because 
I can't read or write. 

Q. You are requested to make your thumb print here on a piece of paper for the 
purpose of identifying your thumb mark. 

(Witness makes thuinb impression on blank sheet of paper, which is attached 
hereto.) 

Q. Are you acquainted with Mary Ross? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know a Mary Ross? — ^A. No, sir. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, 
notary public, on March 9, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster BalUnger, with the petition 
for the enrollment of Mary Ross and her child as citizens by blood of the Choctaw 
Nation: 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age and that 
he lives near Boggy Depot, Okla. 

"That he knows the applicant, Mary Ross; her maiden name was Mary Fulson; 
she was the daughter of William Fulson, who was mostly considered a full-blood 
Choctaw, but may have had some white blood; that her mother was Fannie Fulson, 
and she was a mixed blood, about three-fourth Choctaw. 

"Affiant further states that he knows where the applicant was born, and that it was 
in Old Atoka, near the toll bridge on Old Lady Flax's place; that she lived there 
until she was a good-sized girl, and then her mother took her to Oklahoma City. 

"I Ipst track of her then for a good many years and was talking and inquiring about 
her last fall to Julius Fulsom, at Atoka; he stated that her mother had died, and that 
she was just l,eft to go it alone and that she was somewhere and he had also lost her. 

"I have been staying in Muskogee for some time, and have met her and now know 
that she lives at HaskeU, and she tells me that she has lived there for the last past 
two years. 

"The other places she has lived she has t! Id me about, and I know the peaces, but 
can't say how long she Uved at any of them only what she tells me. 

"I know nothing of her child only what she tells me. 

"Affiant further states that he was personally acquainted with the Fulsom family, 
to which the father of the applicant belonged, and that the said father of the appli- 
cant had about seven or eight brothers and that they were all enrolled Choctaws that 
lived to be enrolled; that the names of the ones that I know best and remember were 
Emmerson Fulson, Dr. Fulson, Jidius Folson; that were finally enrolled; William 
died a long time ago. 

(Signed, by thumb mark.) "Alec Nail." 

Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. No; not all of that. I know the ^yoman that 
they are talking about that claimed William Fulson was her father; that is about all 
I know. 

Q. You made this affidavit that^— ? — A. She claimed that William Fulson was 
her father. I know him, and that is all I know, and what I told them; I don't know 
her. 

Q. You did not know this woman who represented herself to be Mary Ross? — A. No 
sir. 

Q. Had you ever seen her? — A. Not to my knowledge. 

Q. You knew nothing about her parentage?— A. No, sir; only what she claimed 
I knew William Fulson. 

Q. You sav that she claimed to be the daughter of William Fulson?— A. Yes, sir, 

Q. What VV'illiam Fulson; where did he live?— A. I don't know where he lived 
up to his death. I don't know only where Julius is living. 

Q. Did William have any brothers? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Name them? — A. Rufus. 

Q. Where did he live when you knew him? — A. They lived down on Blue. 

Q. What direction from Durant? — A. East. 

Q. IIow far from Caddo?— A. Well, I don't know, sir; I don't know exactly how 

Q. Was William Fulson married?— A. I don't know that. 

Q. How old a man was he?— A. If he had lived he would have been as old as 1 am 
I reckon. 

Q. When did you know him? — A. In my boyhood days. 

Q. IIow long has he been dead?— A. I don't know now; I don't know when ho 
died, or where he died, or whether he is dead at all. 

Q. Do you know whether he had any children? — A. I don't know. 

Q. You do not know when he died?— A. No, sir; no, sir. 



88 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 191'7. 

Q. You say that voii do not know whether he was married or not? — A. No, sir; 
I am certain of one thing, and that is, if he was married at all it was not to Mary Ross's 
mother, for Mary Ross is colored. 

Q. What is this woman's color? — A. Just a shade darker than I am. 

Q. Just a shade darker than you are? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You are what they call ? — A. Dark bay. 

Q. ^\'hat did you get for making this affidavit for Mary Ross? — A. I don't know 
whether $1 or $1.50. 

Q. Was the affidavit read over to you? — A. Every one that my thumb is on was read 
over. They said they read them over, but from what you said there they did not 
read that. 

Q. Would you have signed an affidavit testifying that you knew this family and 
that you knew her father and mother? — A. No, sir; becaus'e I don't know the family 
or the mother, but only the man she claimed was her father, but am not positive he 
was or not. 

Q. Do you know a man by the name of Thos. F. Eubanks? — A. Yes, sir; know him 
since he has been coming up to this office. 

Q. You never saw him before? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Was there a white man by this name who came up to this office and made appli- 
cation? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do yoii know where he lives? — A. No, sir; somewhere in the Creek Nation. 

Q. How old a man is he? — A. Looks like he is about 50 or 55 years old; not as 
old as I am. 

Q. You say you never saw this man until he asked you to be a witness for him? — 
A. No, sir; would not know him this morning if I would meet him. 

Q. Did you know his parents? — A. No, sir; I forgot now what he said; he chimed 
kin to some Indian family 

Q. Do you know Joe Eubanks? — A. Is he a Choctaw? 

Q. Do you know Joe Eubanks? — A. No, sir; I don't reckon so. 

Q. Did you ever know a William Eubanks? — A. Yes, sir; I think so. 

Q. You think? — A. I am not positive. 

Q. Do you know where he lived? — A. No, sir; they used to live close to Wheelock. 

Q. Is Wheelock close to Fort Towson? — A. Yes, sir; in Towson County. 

Q. How far from Fort Towson? — A. I don't know. I left there when I was 11 
years old and I couldn't say. 

Q. Do you know a Betsy Robbins? — A. I don't know but I know some Choctaw 
Robbins. 

Q. Did you ever know a Besty Robbins who married a Eubanks? — A. No, sir; 
I don't know that, because I didn't know who they married. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, 
a notary public, on March 2G, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with the petition 
for the enrollment of Thomas F. Eubanks et al. for enrollment as citizens by blood 
of the Choctaw Nation: 

"Alec Nail, being first dulv sworn, on oath stated that he is 72 years of age, and 
that he lives at 1206 South Third Street, Muskogee, Okla. 

"That he has recently met the applicant and that he is well and personally ac- 
quainted with the Choctaw Indians that he claims to have been his ancestors. 

"That his said father, ^^'illiam Eubanks, was the son of old Joe Eubanks and that 
were always counted full blood; they lived like full bloods. They lived about 4 
miles east of Fort Towson, where I lived until I was 12 years old. I further know that 
some of the same family moved up to near Old Scullyville, where the applicant says 
he was born. 

"I knew Betsey Robins, the woman that he says is his mother, and have been told 
that she married a Eubanks ; in fact it was generally known that she married a Eubanks; 
she lived in huts just like the other full bloods and was counted full blood. 

"All the above persons referred to were C'hoctaw Indians and all lived in either the 
Choctaw or Chickasaw Nations. 

"Affiant further states that he has heard read the affidavit of old Isaac Fulsom, with 
whom he was well and personally acquainted and if there had been any doubts about 
the parties being Indians, he would never have given them such an affidavit. 

(Signed, by thumb mark.) "Alec Nail." 

Q. What do you know about this affidavit; did you make it? — A. Yes, sir; as far as 
the Robins family is concerned I did, but I don't know anything about the Eubank 
family. 

Q. You just told me that you were not acquainted with Betsy Robins? — A. I am 
acquainted with the Robins family, but I am not certain that I am acquainted with 
Betsy Robins. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 89 

Q. This affidavit states that Betsy married a Eubanks; is that correct? — A. I don't 
know anything about her marriage. 

Q. You state in this affidavit that William Eubanks was this applicant's father; 
that he was the son of old Joe Eubanks and you have just stated to me that you did 
not know this person? — A. Well, not to my mind, but if you would call over their 
names I could recall them. I never knew nothing of the Eubanks until they came 
here. 

Q. Was this affidavit read over to you before you made your thumb print thereon? — - 
A. Yes, sir; they read them over; I don't know what they were doing. 

Q. ^\Tiy did you make an affidavit that you knew the persons named in the affidavit 
when you state to me that you do not know them? — A. I don't know as I did. I am 
positive that I swore I knew the Robins. 

Q. What was given you for making this affidavit? — A. I am not certain of the 
amount. 

Q. Do you remember what was given you for making this particular affida^dt? — A. 
No, sir; I don't; it was not much. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Annie Abernathy or Annie Frazier? — A. I don't 
remember an Annie Frazier. 

Q. Well Annie Abernathy or Annie Frazier? — A. No, sir; I am not acquainted with 
them. 

Q. Did you ever know a woman by the name of Caroline Tyson or Caroline Frazier? — 
A. Yes. sir; I am acquainted with them; they were Chickasaws. 

Q. They were Chickasaws? — -A. Yes, sir; they are Chickasaws. 

Q. Did you know Sam Tyson? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who was he; was he a Choctaw? — A. Chickasaw. 

Q. Where did Sam Tyson live? — A. In the early days he lived at the mouth of the 
AVashita. 

Q. That is not close to Fort Towson? — A. No, sir; 100 miles away. 

Q. You say that you know Caroline Tyson or Caroline Frazier? — A. Caroline Tyson 
I think they called her. 

Q. Did Caroline Tyson have any brothers or sisters? — A. I don't remember whether 
8he did or not. 

Q. Did you ever know Susan Factory? — A. Factory, yes, sir. 

Q. Who was Susan Factory? — A. P\ill blood Chickasaw family. 

Q. Do you know who her mother was? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did she have any brothers or sisters? — A. Wilson Hawldns. 

Q. ^\'illiam Hawkins you say? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he go by the name of Frazier at any time?— A. No, sir; not that I know of. 

Q. Did you ever know a Dudley Frazier? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was he related to Wilson Hawkins? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you know Tom Frazier?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was he related to Caroline Tyson? — A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Was Dudley Frazier related to Caroline Tyson? — A. I don't know, they claimed 
kin. Diidley and Tom are kin. 

Q. Kin to each other? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You do not know whether they were kin to Caroline Tyson? — A. No, sir; I don't 
know. 

Q. Did you know a Jim Alber.son? — A. Yea, sir; I knew him. 

Q. Did you know Jim Alberson's wife? — ^A. The only Jim Alberson I know is a 
colored man. 

Q. Colored man? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know a Joe Tyson? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he have aiiy brothers?— A. I think he did; the Jim Tyson I know though is 
a negro. 

Q. Did lie have a brother named Ed? — A. He might of had, 1 am not certain. 

Q. How al)out Dudley; was it Dudley Tyson or Dudley Frazier that you knew? — ^A. 
I knew Dudley Frazier, they are part Indians, one-half bloods. 

Q. What is the other half? — A. White; a white-looking Indian. 

Q. Tom also?— A. Yes. 

Q. You say you knew a George Frazier?^ — A. No, sir. 

Q. You say you do not know a Wilson Frazier? — A. I think I do but I don't think 
I mentioned him in the affidavit. 

Q. Was Joe a negro? — A. Yes, sir. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, 
a notary public, on May 6, 1!)15, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with the petition for 
the enrollment of Annie Abernathy as a citi«en of the Choctaw Nation: 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 70 years of age and that 
he lives 1206 South Third Street, Muskogee, Okla. 



90 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

"That he is well and personally acquainted with the applicant and that he has 
known her since she was a small girl. 

"That he was also well and personally acquainted with both her father and mother. 
Her mother was Caroline Tyson, nee Frazier, who was a three-quarter Choctaw Indian 
by blood; that her father was Sam Tyson, who was a full-blood Chickasaw Indian 
who lived in the Choctaw Nation near Old Fort Towson . 

"I don't know when he died; when I moved away from that part of the country 
he was still living; after that the applicant came to near Caddo and in that part of 
the nation, and neither her father and mother came with her; I was informed that 
they were both dead and had died at or on the old home near Fort Towson. It was 
called the old Sam Tyson place. 

"That the said mother had quite a number of brothers and sisters, some of whom I 
am informed, were enrolled and some died before final enrollment. I knew Dudley, 
Tom, George, and Wilson Frazier; all of these were full-blood Choctaws; she also had 
fiome sisters, Susan was the oldest one; Joe Factory's wife, Jim Alberson's vnie, were 
also sisters and full bloods. 

"That her said father had brothers that I also knew; they were Joe and Ed Tyson- 
they both got allotments and they are called full-blood Chickasaws; he also had a 
sister Mary that was allotted. 

"That he has knowTi the applicant at the different places that she has lived near 
Bokchito, Caddo, and in that part of the country until she came to Muskogee, some 
three or four years ago. 

"(Signed, by thumb mark) Alec Nail." 

Q. Did you make this affida\'it?- — A. Not all that that is stated there. 

Q. Did you sign a statement relating all these farts?— A. No, sir. They took the 
roll book out and pointed to a number and asked if you knew so and so, but they 
could get that ^nthout me. 

Q. Did yoxi swear that you knew all these facts of your own personal knowledge?' — 
A. No, sir. AVhat did the call that woman— Annie Abernathy? 

Q. Her name as it appears here is Annie Abernathy, nee F'razier. — A. She is just 
a yellow woman; she is not a Choctaw at all. She is just a nigger around Muskogee; 
that is all there is to it. 

Q. You said just now that you were not acquainted with this woman until she was 
introduced to you?— A. Yes, sir; they took out the roll book and asked me if I knew 
a Frazier, and I said >es. 

Q. You knew nothing about this woman's parentage or any of her relatives?- A. 
No, sir; she had negro blood in har, I didn't think she was related to them Fraziers, 
as they were Indians and this woman was negro. 

Q. You say that Mr. Lindly wrote this affidavit?— A. He typewrote them and would 
give them to the colored lawyer. 

Q. Was this colored lawyer in there all the time you made th-s affidas^it?- — A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Were you required to raise your right hand and swear to this affidavit to which 
you attachad your thumb mark?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You don't remember what this woman gave you for making this affidavit for 
you?— A. No, sir; I don't exactly. 

Q. Are you acquainted "uTth ^lary Reeves, nee Hampton?— A. There has been 
some Hamptons down to that office, some that claim to be Hamptons. I don't 
remember now whether there was any named Mary or what. 

Q. Did you sign an affida\dt as a witness for a woman named Hampton?— A. I 
think so. 

Q. You had not seen or knew this Woman previously to the time she came here? — 
A. Never seen her until that day. 

Q. Was she a colored woman? — A. Yes, sir; she was a yellow woman. 

Q. Do you remember who she claimed were her parents?- — A. I think she claim 
that she was kin to the Hamptons down there, to the Choctaw Hamptons down there 
and she claimed to be related to them. 

Q. Do you know what particular Hampton she claimed to be her father? — A. No, 
sir; I have forgotten now which one; several of those old men down there. You have 
it there. 

Q. What do you mean by saying I have it here?— A. Who she claimed was her 
daddy; I can't remember what she claimed. 

Q. You mean that you would take what they said about their parents and swear 
to what they told you?- — A. No, sir; I would only swear what I knew about the Indians. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, 
a notary public, on May 14, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger, w ith petition of 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1911. 91 

Mary Reeves, n^e Hampton, for the enrollment of herself and others as citizens of 
the Choctaw Nation. 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age, and that 
he lives at 1006 South Third Street, Muskogee, Okla. 

"That he is well and personally acquainted with the grandfather of this applicant; 
his name was Isaac Hampton; that he had three brothers, Joe, Jim, and Nicklos, and 
all of them were the first emigrants from Mississippi to the Indian Territory, or among 
the first. 

"That all four of them raised families and I was well acquainted with the older 
one; I never knew but one child that Isaac Hampton raised, although there might 
have been others that I don't now recall; the one that I do remember was Delia 
Hampton. 

"Affiant further states that the said Delia Hampton had a little girl child; that they 
lived with her said father, Isaac Hampton. 

"That one of his plantations, and the one that he lived on when I left that part 
of the country, was at the mouth of Kiamiche River. 

"That all of the abo\e-named Hamptons were full-blood Choctaw Indians. 

"That all of the older ones of the Hamptons died before final enrollment, but left 
children that are on the roll. I know Ji lius and Ben Hampton that are enrolled 
and allotted; they are the children of the aboA-e-named Nicklos by his second wife, 
which was a white woman. 

"His first wife was a full-olood and they raised a family; one of them I remember 
is Collin Hampton; he is aboiit my age and lives near McAlester. The above-named 
Ben Hampton lives at Chickasha, and Julius lives at Caddo. 

"There are many more that I know or have known that are allotted and all of them 
are the descendants of the same common ancestor of this applicant or his brothers. 

"Affiant further states that he is not personally acquainted with the family of this 
applicant and only knows about them and that she has quite a family and that they 
are now all li\T.ng at or near Vian. Okla. 

"(Signed, by thumb mark) Alec Nail." 

Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. Yes, sir; I made it. I made part of it, but I 
didn't make all of it, because I couldn't of — I couldn't of. 

Q. \Miat part of this affidavit did you make that was of your personal knowledge? — 
A. I knew old man Wade, old man Nicies and Ben Hampton; they had the boll book 
and would ask me if I knew them and I said, yes, sir; I know them. 

Q. They would take the roll and you told them that you were acquainted with 
them? — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. Did you sign an affidavit for more than one family in the office of Webster Bal- 
linger? — A. I don't remember, I think that was the only one. Sometimes they 
would come up and have 8 or 10 yearlings with them. 

Q. You say that you didn't know about the parents of this woman here? — A. No, 
sir; I don't know that. That petition was to go down in the Nation and was to be iden- 
tified by the Choctaw people. She had the papers and went down to be identified. 

Q. Have you ever been down to Fort Towson or that neighborhood since you left? — 
A. No, sir; I was 11 years old when I left. 

Q. Have not been over there since that time? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You have been away from there about 62 years? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Alice Cole? — A. No, sir; I don't recollect that I know 
her. 

Q. Did you sign an affidavit in Mr. Ballinger's office for a woman named Alice 
Cole? — A. Alice Cole; I don't remember her; probably I have, but I don't know 
whether it was that name or not. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made liy you before Julius Golden, 
a notary public, on April 14, 1915, filed by Mr. We])ster I5ailing(>r with a petition for 
the enrollment of Alice Cole as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation: 

"Alec Nail, being firf^t duly sworn on oath states that he is 72 years of age, and that 
he lives at Muskogef', Okla. 

"That he has only known the applicant a short time; but that he has always known 
the parties that she claims are her descendants; thyt the Hill Davis that she says is her 
father was always considered a full-blood Choctaw Indian and had some cattle, and he 
just looked after them and grazed them from one range to another from (^oalgate to 
Red River and east of Shawneetown. He had two l)rothers, Jim and Joe Davis. 
They were all Snake Indians and Jim Davis was the secretary, and I paid my fees to 
him. I don't know if they or either of them are alive now or not. 

"That her said mother, Lulu Davis, n6e Wilson, was the wife of the said Bill Davis 
and she was the sister of old John Wilson and he is living, about 6 months ago. There 



92 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

is another, named George, who came from Mississippi; that is, I have heard my parents 
say that they came from Mississippi with him. 

"All of the Wilsons of this family are full-blood Choctaw Indians. 

(Signed by thumb mark) "Alec Nail." 

Q. Did you make this afTidavit? — A. I think so; part of it. 

Q. A\'hat part did you make? — A. That Choctaw part about the Davis family. I 
remember the woman you gave in as a Choctaw about Alice Cole. 

Q. You remember who Alice Cole was? — A. Yes, sir; after you read her name. 

Q. Had you ever seen that woman before? — A. No, sir; a perfect stranger. 

Q. You knew nothing about her ancestors? — A. Yes, sir; I know those Davises. 

Q. You don't know that the Davis family was related to her, do you? — A. No, sir; 
she acknowledged that she came out of Texas and then stayed in the Nation. They 
kept her there a day and a half. 

Q. They kept her there a day and a half? — A. Yes, sir. She was just a Texas negro. 
I told them I didn't think she had a drop of Choctaw blood in her. They would ask 
me if I knew those Indians and I would say yes, sir; I know them. They would say 
do you know George Davis or Jim Davis, and I would say yes, sir; I know them. If 
they had not had the roll book, they would not of had as many people. 

Q. Do you remember what this woman paid you for making this affidavit. — A. Sh9 
promised to give me $2.50, liut I only got a dollar. 

Q. What did Durant get from this applicant? — A. That is the secret part of it. 

Q. Did you ever see the applicants give him any money? — A. No, sir; you couldn't 
see them. 

Q. Why? — A. Because they went in that cut-off so you couldn't see them — little 
room there. 

Q. W^ho went in there with him? — A. Durant and the claimants. 

Q. Were they alone? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He seemed to do all of the talking? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who paid Mr. Golden, the notary public? — A. Those people who made the 
affidavits. That would be $2, as they said the law required them to have two wit- 
nesses and would charge $2. 

Q. What was that for? — A. Notary fees they called it. 

Q. Do you know a person named Jane Driver? — A. I don't remember. 

Q. Did you sign an affidavit identifying such a person in Ballinger's office? — A. No, 
sir; I never identified a soul in that office; they have not a man in that office that I 
knew. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, 
a notary public, on May 11, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with a petition for 
the enrollment of Jane Driver as a citizen 1y Ijlood of the Choctaw Nation: 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age and that 
he lives at 1006 South Third Street, Muskogee, Okla. 

"That he is well and personally acquainted with the applicant and that he knew 
her long time before she was married ; 

"That he knew her grandmother, Becky Turnbull, and she was a full-blood Choc- 
taw Indian; she was the sister of Old Bob and Bill Turnbull, who were among the 
first Choctaws from Mississippi to the Indian Territory; 

' ' That her mother was Harriett Turnbull, who married a man by the name of William 
Brown and was only half-blood Choctaw Indian; 

"That when I first knew the applicant she was li\ing in Towson County and that 
they moved from there to Kiamisch County and lived there a long time and then 
moved to Qaddo and from there to the Creek Nation, about five years ago. 

"I just know that she has two children; one named Jesse that was drowned since 
she came to the Creek Nation; the other is still l>i\ing and must be about 20 years of 
age. 

"I know the applicant to be the same person that I knew when she was quite small 
for the reason that she never could talk to amount to anything; when she was small 
she could not talk hardly at all and now does not talk intelligently; that is, as far as 
speech is concerned. She was always mentally all right but did not have the faculty 
of speech. 

"I had a talk a long time ago with Henry Bynum and Willis Tobler, both full- 
blood Choctaws that were looking after the enrollment of the Choctaws, and they 
both told me that she had been looked after and that she was all right. 

"They were then agents for the "Snake" faction, and said he had enrolled her 
there, and that was sufficient. He enrolled me the same way, but I afterward enrolled 
with the Dawes Commission. 

"I was the town king and was appointed by Chitto Harjo at one of his councils at 
the Old Hickory Camp Ground, in the Creek Nation. 

(Signed by thumb mark) "Alec Nail." 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, lO'lT. 93 

Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. I know that when — I just don't know. I 
know that when — I don't understand it. 

Q. Did you ^ve Mr. Lindly the facts contained in this affidavit? — A. Well, I 
either gave him the facts or gave them to Durant. 

Q. Did you make this statement to Lindly? — A. Not all of what he said in there, 
I didn't. 

Q. Did you make this statement to Nelson Durant?- — A. Part of that. 

Q. What part did you make to Durant? — A. Well, I don't know. I have known 
this family a good while, but to know whether this applicant had Indian in her or 
not I don't know that. I asked her why she was not on the roll, and she said that 
Henry Bynum and Willis Tobler 

Q. That is all you know about it? — A. Yes, sir; I never seen her until I seen her 
down in that office. 

Q. You say you never knew her before she came to that office? — A. Yes, sir; this 
woman was an insane woman; you couldn't understand a thing she said; that is a 
God's fact. 

Q. Was Judge Lindly in the room when these applicants were examined? — A. Yes, 
sir; they were examined by him. 

Q. Ail of them? — A. Yes, sir; the witnesses were examined by him. 

Q. Who examined them first? — A. Well, it was written down by Nelson Durant in 
a little room. 

Q. How many rooms have they? — A. Two outside of the little room. 

Q. How large is the little room you speak of? — A. A very little room. 

Q. 'Wliich room was Nelson Durant in? — A. Next to where the white ladies worked. 

Q. Which office did he have, the one the applicants waited in? — A. He stayed in the 
room where the applicants first went. 

Q. And Lindly was in the other room? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And would they first be examined by Nelson Durant? — A. I don't know whether 
you would call it that. 

Q. Would he ask them questions first? — A. Yes, sir; he was guided by the roll book, 
got their roll number and age from the roll book. 

Q. And after he examined them would he take them in to Mr. Lindly? — A. Yes, 
sir; a great part of the time he would hold what he was reading. 

Q. He read it off to Lindly? — A. Yes, sir; the applicants did not have much to say 
when they came in there. It was already written off. 

Q. Mr. Lindly did not question these persons himself, then? — A. Not a great deal. 

Q. Did you talk to Mr. Lindly about these applicants?— A. Yes, sir; he would ask 
me about the people they were talking about. 

Q. WTio wrote your affidavit? — A. Mr. Lindly. 

Q. Did he question you as to what you knew about the applicants?— A. Yes, sir; 
about every one of them. 

Q. Mr. Lindly did? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I thought you said he took what Nelson Durant would tell him?— A. It is this 
way : Nelson Durant would write up what the applicants had to say and hand it to Mr. 
Lindly and then Mr. Lindly would (juestion me about what I knew about the appli- 
cants "and write it out on the typewriter. 

Q. Would Nelson Durant question you first as to what you knew about the appli- 
cants? — A. Yes, sir; he would ask me if I knew those people. A woman or man 
would claim to be a Choctaw; take the Hunter family; do you know Tom Hunter and 
that he has a grandson ; do you know that, and I would say, yes, sir. 

Q. You know nothing about the ancestors of this woman who calls herself Jane 
Driver? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do not know whether she is a Choctaw by blood?— A. No, sir; I don't believe 
there is a bit in her. 

Q. This woman who calls herself Jane Driver, was she a negro?— A. Looks just about 
like I do. 

Q. Just about your color? — A. Yes, sir; about my color. 

Q. In this affidavit which you made in support of the petition of Jane Driver for 
enrollment as a citizen of the" Choctaw Nation, you are made to state that you knew 
this applicant when she was a small child; that you remember that she could not talk 
to amount tf) anything; that she was mentally all right but did not have the faculty of 
speech. Did you state this in Mr. Ballinger's office?— A. No sir; there was no need 
of it. " 

Q. Did you know this woman when she was a small child? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You "did not state, then, that you knew she could not talk when she was a small 
child? — A. I don't remember. 



94 INDIAN APPEOPKIATION BILL, 1917. 

Q. Did you state that you had ever had a talk with Henry Bynum and Willis 
Tobler? — A. No, sir; that is what she said. 

Q. Were you ever acquainted with Becky Turnbull? — A. I might have been, 
1 know several Turnbull families, but 1 don't remember that now. 

Q. Do not lemember whether you were acquainted with Becky Turnbull? — A. No, 
sir; I don't remember. 

Q. Did you know Bob and Bill Turnbull?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Know them both? — A. Yes, sir; they were some of the first Indians that first 
came from Wis.sissippi. 

Q. Do you know whether they had a sister named Becky? — A. No, sir; heard them 
say they did but I don't know. 

Q. Do you know whether Becky Turnbull was the grandmother of Jane Driver, this 
colored woman? — A. I don't believe she was. 

Q. Do you remember Harriett Turnbull? — A. I think so — no, but in the state- 
ment she mentioned that name or they got it from the roll book. 

Q. You do not remember her? — A. No, sir; I don't know much about the family. 

Q. Do you know William Brown, a Choctaw? — A. I know a colored man down 
there. 

Q. You do not know whether William Brown married Harriett Turnbull? — A. No, 
sir; I don't know. 

Q. You never knew this woman in Towson County, this applicant, Jane Driver? — 
A. No, sir; I haven't been there since I was a little boy. 

Q. Did you ever know this woman in Kiamichi County? — A. I knew a woman 
who claimed to be her mother in Kiamichi County. 

Q. Who did this woman claim was her mother? — A. WTiat family of Indians? 
I know the family of Indians she claims to be kin to. 

Q. Did this woman ever live around Caddo to your knowledge? — A. Not to my 
knowledge. 

Q. Do you recall a woman who claimed to be a descendant of the Wright family of 
Choctaws? — A. I recall a woman that claimed to be a daughter of old Leonard Wright. 

Q. Had you ever seen this woman before you met her in Mr. Ballinger's office? — A. 
Never did. 

Q. Who was Leonard Wright? — ^A. Well, he was a Choctaw; I was not acquainted 
with him like I was with Alford and the old governor. 

Q. How do you know he was a brother of the old governor? — A. He was said to be. 

Q. Was he a brother of old Gov. Wright? — A. Yes, sir; Allen Wright's father, at 
McAlester. 

Q. Were they full bloods? — A. Yes, sir; old Gov. Wright was a full blood. 

Q. What would you say if you were told that Allen Wright did not have a brother? — ■ 
A. Well, I would just have to take it, because I don't know; he was said to be Alfred 
Wright's brother, but I am not certain about it. 

Q. I am talking about Allen Wright, who was at one time governor of the Choctaw 
Nation? — A. Yes, sir; I understand. 

Q. Were you personally acquainted with this Leonard Wright? — A. No, sir; I don't 
know him. 

Q. Would you know him if you would see him? — A. No, sir; Allen Wright and the 
old governor 1 know. 

Q. How many brothers did Allen Wright have? — ^A. I don't know that. 

Q. Did you know any of them? — A. Alford was his brother; they say he is. 

Q. Do you know Alford? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He was a brother of Gov. Wright? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did Alford live? — A. About 12 miles below Caddo. 

Q. Was he a full brother? — A. I don't know about that. 

Q. You did not know him or any of them? — A. No, sir; if an Indian is a cousin, 
they claim them to be brothers. 

Q. Was this woman who claimed to be a daughter of Leonard Wright a negro? — A. 
Yes, sir; she was yellow. 

Q. She was yellow? — A. Yes, sir; I told them to send that [indicating papers in 
this case filed by Ballinger] to McAlester, but they wouldn't do it. Three Texas 
witnesses were there to that. 

Q. You say they had three Texas negroes to witness there? — A. They had two; I 
■will say that. Bill McCombs brought them up here. 

Q. Bill McCombs brought them here? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you make an affidavit for this woman? — A. Only for the Wright family. I 
never saw the woman until that day. 

Q. Did vou know Jack Wright? — A. Yes, sir; I don't think he was kin to the 
other Wrights. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 95 

Q. What direction did Jack Wright live from Atoka? — A. Southwest, I think. 

Q. How far? — A. I think about 7 or 8 miles. 

Q. Was he an Indian, a white man, or a darkey? — A. He was a full blood. 

Q. Did he have any sisters? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Did he have a sister who married a Wimley?— A. I never heard that name 
before that I know of. 

Q. Could you be mistaken about Jack Wright and Alford Wright being brothers? — 
A. Sure, I don't remember ever saying that. 

Q. You could be mistaken about them being brothers of former Gov. Allen Wright? 
— A. Yes, sir; I don't know. 

Q. Do you remember a woman by the name of Elmyra Wimley? — A. I don't be- 
lieve I do. 

The affida\'it purporting to have been signed by you before Julius Golden, a notary 
public, on June 24, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with the petition of Bertha 
Tobler for the enrollemnt of herself and family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw 
Nation, is as follows: 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age, and 
that he lives at 1006 South Third Street, Muskogee, Okla. 

"That he knows the applicant, and that he was well and personally acquainted 
with the Wrights, who were always said to be and recognized as full-blood Choctaw 
Indians, and who she claims as her ancestors. 

"That the names of the older ones of the boys were Leonard, Alfred, and Jack 
Wright. I don't know how many sisters there were, but one of them married a Wim- 
ley, whom the applicant claims as her mother. 

"The above-named Wrights were all brothers and were related in some way with 
Allen Wright, who was at one time the governor of the Choctaw Nation. 

"All of the Wrights above named and many others all lived south from Atoka and 
down on the mouth of Blue River, and they were all recognized Choctaw Indians. 

"Affiant further states that the said mother of the applicant, Elmyra Wimley, 
lived prior to her death at what is now Tushka, Okla. That the same place used to be 
called PecK. I don't know just how many children the said Elmyra Wimley had, 
but I do know that there was a bunch of them — seven or eight anyway. Some of 
them died, and they have scattered, and some of them now live in Muskogee. 

"This family were all considered and recognized as Choctaws, and lived and worked 
around the neighborhood. 

"(Signed by thumb mark) Alec Nail." 

Q. Did you make an affidavit for Jackson Barrett for use in his application for 
enrollment? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you know Jackson Barrett l)efore you met him in Ballinger's office a short 
time ago? — A. Never seen him before. 

Q. You told me that you made an affidavit for Jackson Barrett in Mr. Ballinger's 
office? — A. Yes, sir; I swore that I knew the Hunter family. 

Q. That you knew the Hunter family? — A. Yes, sir; old Ben Hunter. Tliis man 
claimed that Ben Hunter's daughter was his mother. I didn't know but I knew 
Tommy and Charlie. 

Q. Who did you say Jackson Barrett is? — A. He looked like a white man. 

Q. Did he have any indications of negro blood? — A. No, sir; he just a dark, red- 
headed white man. 

Q. Does he claim to be a negro? — A. No, sir; Choctaw, he claims to be old Benny 
Hunter's grandson. 

Q. Docs he ass jciate with negroes? — A. I don't know; he does not stay around here. 

Q. You say you never knew him until you met him in Muskogee a short time ago? — 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know who his mother was? — A. No, sir; I don't know. This Choctaw 
woman might have liecn his mother, as far as I know. 

Q. You know nothing about it only what he claims? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Who did he claim was his mother? — A. Benny Hunter's (laughter. 

Q. Do you know her name? — A. No, sir; I think it was Becky. I think he said— 

Q. Who did he claim was his father? — A. Well, his father musy have been a white 
man, as there was nothing said al)out him. 

Q. Did you know a person namde Billy Hunter? — A. That is the old man. 

Q. Is he the person you called Benny Hunter? — ^A. Yes, sir; Billy Hunter was his 
name, but the Choctaws called him Benny Hunter. 

Q. He is the person you thought was meant when Benny Hunter was mentioned. 
You mean Billy Hunter? — A. Yes, sir; and there was Silas and Tom Hunter. 

Q. Who was Tom Hunter; whijre does ha live? — A. Is he the person who was a candi- 
date for governor? — A. Yes, sir. 



96 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

Q. Does he live at Hugo? — A. About Hugo, I guess. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Tolliver Barrett? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know whether Tolliver was the father of Jackson Barrett? — A. No^ 
sir; I don't; I don't know that at all. 

Q. Did you know a Clayton Hunter? — A. I knew a Charlie Hunter; there might 
have been a Clayton. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, 
a notary public, on February 20, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with' the peti- 
tion of Jackson Barrett for the enrollment of himself, and others, as citizens by blood 
of the Choctaw Nation : 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age and that 
he lives 1006 South Third Street, Muskogee, Okla. 

"That he knows the applicant and that he was well and personally acquainted with 
his mother, Francis Barrett; her father, old Billy Hunter; they were all full-blood 
Choc taws. 

"I also knew her brothers; one was named Silas Hunter and the other one was 
Thomas Hunter, who run for governor at the last election for chief of the Choctaw 
Nation; I think the oldest one was Nelson. 

"When I am at home I live in Atoka County, but am staying at Muskogee for the 
present. 

"I have met all the older children of the applicant, but I could not positively iden- 
tify them if they were away from home; I do not know that he has a large family and 
that they grew up in the southern part of the Choctaw Nation. 

(Signed, by thumb mark.) "Alec Nail." 

Q. Do you recall a person by the name of Francis Barrett? — A. Probably that is the 
woman. That is wlio he said was his mother. 

Q. You took his word for that? — A. Yes, sir. The old man has three children. 

Q. You do not even know whether Billy or Benny Hunter had a daughter named 
Frances? — A. No, sir; he had one, but I would not be positive. 

Q. Do you know whether Benny Hunter had a son named Silas Hunter? — A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. You do not know whether he had a daughter named Frances? — A. No, sir; I don't 
know. 

Q. Did he have a son named Nelson? — A. He might of had; I don't know. 

Q. What is the street number of your residence in Muskogee? — A. 1006 South 
Third Street. 

Q. Do you know a person named Malissa Marcy, nee Carroll, n^e Birdsong? — 
A. I don't know. 

Q. There is an affida^'it purported to have been made by you in which you are 
made to say that you were acquainted with this person. You say you do not remem- 
ber such a person? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You were made to state that you were personally acquainted with her mother 
and father; that her father's name was Willie Birdson; do you recall a Willie Bird- 
song? — A. Yes, sir; I don't know him, but there has been a man up there that claims 
to be a Birdson. 

Q. You do not know that that person is the father of this applicant? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You were made to state that her mother was Adaline Sanders; do you remember 
her? — A. It seems that some one was in that office by the name of Sanders. 

Q. You mean to say that Adaline Sanders, who married Willie Birdson, was the 
mother of the applicant in this case? — A. No, sir; I don't know who they was talking 
about. 

Q. You do not remember this applicant? — A. No, sir; I don't remember her; I don't 
know notliing about the Birdsons. 

Q. Do you remember William Sanders? — A. No, sir. 

The affi'davit of Alec Nail, made before Julius Golden on March 16, 1915, filed by 
Mr. Webster Ballinger, vnth the petition for the enrollment of Malissa Marcy for 
enrollment of herself and family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation, is as 
follows : 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age and that 
his post office is Boggy Depot, Okla. 

"That he knows the applicant, but that he has not known her very long; that he 
was well and personally acquainted with her father and mother. 

"Her father was Willie Birdson, a half-blood Choctaw Indian that was placed on 
the freedman roll over his protest; that her mother was Adaline Sanders before she 
married Willie Birdsong, and that she was a three-quarter Choctaw Indian by blood. 

"That they both lived in what was old Scully ville County, now Le Flore, near the 
line of Arkansas. 



INDIAN APPKOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 97 

"That all of the Sanders were all recognized Choctaw Indians; that William Sanders 
was the brother of her said mother, Adaline Birdsong, n^e Sanders. 
"That he does not know any of the applicant's family. 

"(Signed by thumb mark) Alec Nail." 

"Q. Do you remember a person named Jordeana Smyers, nee Givens? — A. No, sir; 
I don't remember her. 

"Q. In the afhdavit filed in the application for the enrollment of this person, made 
by you on April 13, 1915, you state that you were acquainted with the api>licant and 
that you knew the persons whom she stated were her ancestors and with her grand- 
mother, Ellen Pusley, a full-blood Choctaw? Do you remember Ellen Pusley? — 
A. I remember the Pusleys; they were Choctaw Indians. I don't remember, though, 
the woman who made that application. 

"Q. Do you remember the brothers of Ellen Pusley?^ — A. Three of them, I do. 

"Q. What were their names?- — A. George, Billy, and Josh. 

"Q. Who was Jack Pusley? — A. 1 don't know. 

"Q. You do not remember?- — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Who was McAlester Pusley? — A. I don't remember. 

"Q. Do you remember Adaline Pusley? — A, No. sir; I just know Ellen and Elmyra, 

The affidavit made in supi^ort of the petition of this case by Alec Nail, on April 13, 
1915, before Julius Golden, a notary public, filed by Webster Ballinger for the enroll- 
ment of Jordeana Smyers and family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation, 
is as follows : 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age and that 
he now lives at 1206 South TMrd Street, Muskogee. 

"That he has recently become accjuainted with the applicant, but that he knows 
the persons that she states is her ancestors. 

"That he was well and personally acquainted with her said grandmother, Ellen 
Pusley, who was a full-blood Choctaw Indian. That she had two brothers, McAlester 
Pusley and old Jack Pusley, that were allotted as he has been informed. 

"That h3 was well and personally acquainted with the daughter of Ellen Pusley 
named Adaline, but that he does not know who she married, and never had heard 
until he met the applicant. 

"That he did not know the father of the applicant, nor does he know her family. 

(Signed, by thumb mark) "Alec Nail." 

Mr. Webster Ballinger has filed an application for the enrollment of one John 
Harrison and his family. Attached to this application is an affidavit purporting to 
have been made by you before Julius Golden, a notary public, on March 4, 1915, 
in which you are made to state that you are well and personally acquainted with the 
applicants and have known them all their lives- — A. I haven't known them that 
long. 

Q. A\ hat have you to say about this; do you know these persons? — A. I am better 
acquainted with them since I have been in Muskogee. The old man was half Indian 
and half negro 

Q. Old man Harrison claimed to be -A. Half brother of Robert, William, and 

John Harrison, and I know them to be Indians, and they claimed to be related to them. 

Q. Did you know this j^erson who represented himself to be John Harrison, named 
in the application for enrollment? — A. I expect I knew him. 

Q. But you can not place him right now? — A. I guess I would know him. 

Q. Did you know him before you met him at the time he made this application? — 
A. Not to have ideutided him; I met the old man when 1 lived at Durant. 

Q. You mean these boys' father? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. W hat was the name of their father? — A. John Harrison or Sloan. 

Q. You mean his surname was Sloan? — A. No, Harrison. 

Q. Did they call him Sloan Harrison? — A. Yes, sir; and sometimes old man Harri- 
son. 

Q. Did you know enough about this man Harrison to testify as to who his parents 
were? — A. No, sir; my brother knew him; he was over here. 

Q. Your brother is Peter Nail? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. \\ ere you ever at the home of the father? — A. Yes, sir; 1 hav? ))assed there a time 
or two. 

Q. \\ere you ever at the home of the apiilicant in this case, John Harrison? — A. No, 
sir; I don't know whether these young children had any home or not. The Choc- 
taws just rer'ogni/.ed them. 

Q. You never had, then, a close personal accjuaintance with the father of thi.« 
applicant? — A. No, sir. 

25134— PT 4—16 7 



98 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

Q. W as thid ;i])i)li(ant, John Harrison, a negro?- — A. Yes, sir; sure. 

Q. "What is his color? — A. About mine; dark bay. 

Q. AMiat con^•ention was it that met in 1809 at Boggy Depot? — A. That was when 
the Government sent Maj. Armstrong out there. 

Q. Could you say that you met the father of this applicant at that convention? — 
A. 1 don't remember. 

Q. You do not remember whether you made such a statement? — A. Xo, sir; I 
don't. 

Q. You do not remember whether the name of the father of these applicants was 
\V. J. Sloan Harrison? — A. No, sir; I don't know; they claimed to be his children. 

Q. Y'ou do not really know whether the full and correct name of the Harrison you 
know was W. J. Sloan Harrison; you do not know whether this is his correct name or 
not? — A. No, sir; I don't; they are Texas folks. 

Q. Texas folks? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was the man that you have in mind as the father of John Harrison a negro? — A. 
No, sir; kind of an Indian-looking negro about like my color. 

The affidavit of Alec Nail, made before Julius Golden, a notary public, on March 
4, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with the petition for the enrollment of John 
Harrison and his family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation, is as follows: 

''Comes now Alec Nail, who, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 
years of age, that his home is 3 miles west from Boggy Depot, Okla. 

"That he is well and personally acquainted with the applicants; that he has known 
them in a way all their lives; that he has not personally known them all the time, but 
that he did know their father since the convention atOld Boggy depot, in 1869; that 
they both attended the said convention together and that they have since lived a 
long distance apart, but have met often enough to keep up a personal accpiaintance 
with the father of the said applicants. He was W. J. Sloan Harrison. The reason 
that I kept u]) so close a personal acquaintance with him was that his trading point 
was Durant, Okla., and I lived in Durant. 

"That it is for this reason that I knew him so much better than I did his family. 
Sometimes he had some of them with him and more often he came alone or with just 
his wife, Mahaley. 

"I have been to his house and know that he had his own home on the public domain 
the same as the other Choctaw Indians and that he lived there until he died. 

"No one was ever heard to dispute his right as a Choctaw Indian and he held land 
just the same as the other Choctaw.-i and was so recognized. 

"This continued until after allotment and then he lost his farm because he was not 
enrolled. All I know about his making an application is what he told me and that 
he said he made his a])plication by blood and for the reason that he had some negro 
blood in him, the commission wanted to put him on the Freedman roll, and he would 
not stand for it, and tlie commission denied him." 

(Signed, by thumb mark.) "Alec Nail.'" 

Q. Do you know James Goings?— A. Yes, sir; I know a Jim Goings, since I been 
htro. 

Q. Did you first meet him in Ballinger's office?— A. Yes, sir; the first time in my 
life. 

Q. Do j'^ou know the father and mother of this applicant, Jim Goings? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know whether the father's name was Henry and the mother's name 
was Francis? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever know a Henry and Francis Goings? — A. Y^es, sir; I have heard of 
that family, but that thing [indicating affidavit] was made a long time before I saw it. 

Q. What do you mean?— A. They took this application in a long time before they 
know I was heVe. I was sick but they referred him to me and when I got iip his 
application was made out already and I was just asked about the Goings family and 
I said I knew them. 

Q. Did you know an Isaac Goings? — A. I heard them talking about him; I don't 
know him. 

Q. Y^ou were not personally acquainted with him? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You never met this applicant, James (lojng, for the first time at Doaksville, 30 
years ago? — A. No, sir; I have not been there since I was 11 years of age. 

Q. Do you say that you did not moot this man at Doaksville? — A. No, sir; I couldn't 
of; I left there when I was a little boy. 

Q. There is an affidavit attached to this application, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger, 
acknowledged by you before Julius Golden, a notary public, on March 23, 1915, in 
which you are made to state that you first met this applicant more than 30 years ago 
at Doaksville. — A. No, sir. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 99 

Q. And that you were well and personally acquainted with the father and mothar 
of this applicant, Henry and Francis Goings, and that you knew the brothers of Henry 
Goings, and that their names were George, James, and Alfred. — A. I don't know that 
at all; they are on the roll though, I guess. 

Q. And that the oldsst one died before the war. Did you make these statements 
to any persons in ]Mr. Ballinger's office? — A. Not like you are reading it. 

Q. Did you knowingly make your thumb mark to any affidavit in which you were 
made to testify to these facts? — A. I did not. I thought they were putting down 
just what they asked me. There is a lot of this that was not asked me. 

Q. You say you thought they were putting down what they asked you? — A. Yes, 
sir. Golden read them over and sometimes 1 couldn't understand him nohow. 

Q. You are acquainted with William M. James? — A. Yes, sir; since I have been 
here. 

Q. Did you approach James and request him to act as a witness for Mr. Ballinger 
in the preparation of these applications? — A. No, sir. 

Q. \\'illiam James states that you approached him and told him that you wanted 
him to act as a witness in a number of these cases? — A. He was a witness before I 
came up. 

Q. Did you or did you not approach him relative to this? — A. I did not; I found 
him acting as a witness the first time I went up to Mr. Ballinger's office. He is a 
State man, but married a Creek freedwoman, and has been a resident of the Creek 
Nation and I am satisfied that he knows nothing about the Choctaw people. He 
apparently made affidavits for everybody. Made one for Ben Grayson for a pint of 
whisky; he would swear to anything. They were nearly drunk all the time, and 
old man McCombs was drunk also; he is a white man. 

Q. Is Ben Grayson a white man? — A. A full-blood Creek. 

Q. An old man named Berryhill acted as a witness, did he drink? — A. Yes, sir; 
they all were drunk nearly all the time. 

Q. Did Mr. Tindly drink? — A. I have smelled it on his breath and he acted like it. 

Q. Did you ever see him drunk? — -A. No, sir. 

Q. Never saw him when he apparently did not have control of his mental facul- 
ties? — A. No, sir; I think when he was getting too much he would quit. 

Q. Did they have whisky aroiuul the office? — A. I never saw it 

Q. Do you drink, yourself? — A. No, sir; there is not a man that lives that can say 

80. 

Q. Did Burton drink? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you ever see him full? — A. Yes, sir; pretty full. 

On August 5, 1915, the witness. Alec Nail, was recalled and testified as follows: 

Q. State your name? — A. Alec Nail. 

Q. What is your age?— A. Going on 73; 72. 

Q. Where do you live? — A. I ara living in Muskogee now. 

Q. You live at 1006 South Third Street?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Josie L. Arnold, do you know a woman by that name? — 
A. I don't remember that I know her, I have forgotten her, what is she? 

Q. She is supposed to live in Reeves addition?— A. 1 don't know her. 

Q. Did you make an affidavit in Mr. Ballinger's office identifying a woman named 
Josie L. Arnold? — A. No, sir; there ain't a soul that I identified. 

Q. Do you remember a woman coming to that office by the name of Josie L. Ar- 
nold? — A. It may be true; I don't remember it. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, a 
notary public, on June 22, 1915, filed by I\Ir. Webster Ballinger with the petition for 
the enrollment of Josie L. Arnold, nee Lewis, as a citizen by blood of the Chickasaw 
Nation: 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age and that 
he lives at lOOG South Third" Street, Muskogee. 

"That he knows the applicant, Josie L. Arnold; that he also knew her mother, 
Sofia r.ewis, nee Kemp, and all the Kemp family; that the father of her said mother 
Sofia Lewis, nee Kemp, was Jackson Kemp; 

V "That the said Sofia. Kemp had a numl)er of brothers and sisters: they were Ben- 
jamin, Joel, Walton, 15ud (who was county sheriff for a long time) Kemp; the sisters 
were Amelia, Virginia, ancl Lou Kemp, nearly all of these above-named Indians died 
before final enrollment, although Joel and Benjamin both got allotments. 

"They were all full-blood Indians (Chickasaws), but some of them had Choctaw 
families and were enrolled Choctaws; that is. some of the younger ones. 

"The applicant was raised by old Aunt Calidonia Green, a colored woman who 
was formorlv the slave of her grandfather, Jackson Kemp. 



100 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

"I don't know the age of the applicant, but she is just a young woman and looks 
about as old as she says she is — 26 years of age. 

"The reason that I know the Kemp family so well is that I lived for many years 
within less than half a mile from them, in fact some of them lived within hearing 
distance. 

"The old men of the Kemp family was Jackson Kemp, the grandfather of applicant; 
Reuben Kemp, Billy Kemp, and Joel Kemp, who were all emigrants from Mississippi, 
and all full bloods. 

(Signed, by thumb mark) Alec Nail." 

Q. Did you make this aflidavit? — A. I know the name of some of those Kemps. 
They would ask me about peoyjle named Kemp that I knew, and I would state what I 
knew. Tliis woman was looked up by the roll and they would ask me if 1 knew the 
Kemps, and say go to work and name how many you know, and I would go and name 
as many as I knew. 

Q. Does the reading of this affidavit refresh your memory in respect to this appli- 
cant? — A. No, sir; I don't remember about that; see about what has been 

Q. You can not say that you know this applicant? — A. No. sir; I know I don't 
know her. 

Q. You did not know any (jf the people that you met in that office? — A. No. sir. 

Q. In what office do you mean when you refer to that office? — A. Well, it says 
liallinger, Rodkey & Lindly. They say it is their names on that door. 

Q. What are Lindly's initials? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Are you sure it is Webster Ballinger that is connected witli thai office? — A. 
Yes. sir; that is what they say. 

Q. Do you know whether" Webster Piallinger is connected with the Government 
service? — A. I don't know that. 

Q. Do you know whether Mr. Lindly is connecte:! with the Government service? — 
A. I don't know that. 

Q. Dc you know how much you got for making this affidavit? — A. No, sir; some- 
times I got a dollar, sometimes a dollar and a half, and sometimes i^2. 

Q. Who gave you this money? — A. The applicants. The ones making applica- 
tion; they paid me the money I got. 

Q. Did" you ask for the money?— A. They said if you don't pay the witnesses and 
notary fees the papers don't go out of the office. They said tliat they was to get two 
old members of the tribe; and I was in the Dawes Commission one day and they 
employed me to act and see about it. I didn't have any confidence in it. 

Q. You told me, did yoii not, that most of the persons who applied for enrollment 
down in tlieir oflice as Indians by blood were negroes?— A. Every one ui them. 

Q. And they tried to get on the blood roll? — A. Yes, sir; and I would say "Why 
don't you get "on tht roll \nth me?" but they said they would get on the blood roll. 

Q. Did you know a Sofia Lewis who was a Kemp before she married? — A. I don't 
know; I can't remember. 

Q. Did y<iu ever know Jackson Kemj)? — A. Why, sure; yes. sir. 

Q. What relation was Jackson Kemp to Sofia Kemj)? — A. I couldn't say. 

Q. Do you know whether Sofia Kemp was Jackson Kemp's wife? — A. No, .^ir; 
1 don't know. This Sofia Kemj) you are talking about might not be any Kemp at 
all; I don't know. 

Q. How old would Jack.sdp be if he were living? — A. Jackson Kemp; well, my 
father said they came from Mississip])i in 18P.2. 

Q. You were made to swear in this affidavit that I read to you that this woman who 
appeared in the office down stviirs is the daughter of Sofia Lewis, who had been a Kemp, 
and that Jackson Kemp was the father of Sofia Lewis; what do you know al)OUt that? — ■ 
A. I don't know nothing about that. I don't know who Sofia Lewis was; she may 
have been the mother of the one malcing application. 

Q. You do not rememf>er Sofia Lewis? — A. No, sir; I don't know. 

Q. Do you remember old Aunt ('alidonia Green? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who was she? — A. One of Jackson Kemp's slaves. 

Q. You said you did not know whether Jackson Kemp was the grandfather of this 
applicant? — A. I don't think she was. 

Q. Why?— A. I don't know; I believe Virginia was John Lewis's wife. 

Q. What blood was Jackson Kemp? — A. Well, I would say he was a full-blood; he 
looked to 1)0. 

Q. Full-blood what?- A. Ghickasaw. 

Q. Do you know whether his wife was a full-blood or not? — A. No, sir; T don't know. 

Q. Did his wife have any negro blood in her? — A. No, sir; I have seen her. and she 
<lidn't look it. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 101 

Q. Did you make an affidavit down there for any person who was not a negro? — 
A. Not to my knowledge, except Jackson Barrett and another white man I forget; lets 
see — Mr. Eubanks. 

Q. Do you know where Reeves Addition is? — A. No, sir; I have never been out 
there. 

Q. Were all the women for whom you made affidavits down stairs negroes? — A. Yes, 
sir; all negroes, I believe. 

Q. Well, this applicant states that she was raised by Aunt Callie Green. Did she 
raise any children except negro children? — A. Not to my knowledge. She lived 18 
or 20 miles from me. 

Q. Did you ever live within one-half mile from the Kemp family? — A. When I was 
a little fellow. I left when I was 11 years old. 

Q. You left when you were 11 years old? — A. Yes, sir; I haven't been back since, 
either. 

Q. Can you read? — A. A little in the Bible; can't read to do no good. 

Q. Can you sign your name? — A. Oh,, no; can't write a line. 

Q. Was this affidavit read to you before you signed it? — A. Yes, sir; before I put 
my thumb mark to it. 

"Q. Who read it to you? — A. Mr. Golden. 

Q. Well, this affidavit states that you knew this applicant, Josie L. Arnold. Was 
that part read to you? — A. I don't remember. 

Q. Would you have sworn that you knew this applicant if you had not known her?— 
A. No. sir. 

Q. Did you not understand that you were sworn to this affidavit? — A. I suppose so. 
I was sworn to what I said. 

Q. Would you have signed and sworn to this affidavit that you knew this woman? — 
A. No, sir; because I didn't know her. I know they were Indian people but this 
apy)licant T don't know. I told Mr. Lindly a dozen times that I couldn't identify a 
soul, and didn't intend to try. 

Q. Mr. Lindly knew that you did not know this woman? — A. Yes, sir; I told him 
so. 

Q. You tt>ld nie in testifying in other cases that Mr. Lindly wrote these affidavits 
out on the typewriter himself which you swore to? — A. That colored lawyer and all 
ihcin that is trjdng to get on the roll would get together in the little room and he would 
write a long list. 

v^. WIk is that? — A. Nelson Durant. he would hand it to Mr. Lindly and somtimes 
he stood and read it off and Mr. lindly wrote it. 

Q. So Mr. Lindly wrote on the typewriter the affidavits that you made? — A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. And you say you told Mr. Lindly that you did not know any of the ap])licants 
and did not intend to identify them? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Well, what were you doing down there? — A . I would prove that I knew the ('hoc- 
taws. Advise them. 

Q. You advised about what? — A. They would come tliere and say they were mem- 
bers of some Choctaw family. What family was it and they would name them and if 
I knew them I would say so. 

Q. It was your understanding that you were merely to testify that such a Choctaw 
family li\ed at one time and you would testify as to remembering that family; you did 
not testify that the (daimants were related to any of the members of the families you 
have mentioned? A. No, sir; I coiddu't. 

Q. You did not know the applicants before you nint tlicm down .stairs? — A. No. 
sir. 

Q. And you did not understand that you were advising about that? — A. No, sir; 
and woidd say so. 1 knowed the peoi)le Ihey claimed relation to. 

Q. Did you understand that you were down there to identify the claimants as bein^ 
the children of the persons you named in the aflidavits? — A. No, sir; Mr. Lindly told 
them that the applications woidd be identified with some old peoi)le and when they 
couldn't get me to identify them he said they would have t( have some one to identify 
them . 

Q. He said they would V)e conipleted later? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know Webster Burton? — A. Yes, sir; I know him. 

Q. How kng have you known him? — A. About 14 years, maybe longer 

Q. Did ^^'ebster Burton ever live clo.se to Callie Green ?^A. He lived up in that 
part of the country. 

Q. Do you know how close he li\ed to .\unt Callie Green? — A. Mayl>e 4 or 5 miles. 

Q. What did Web.ster Burton get for making these affidavits? -A . Well, he got 
ju.st what he could, just like me. 



102 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

Q. How long have you been around this office downslairs here making these affi- 
davits? — A. I don't remember when I first went there. 

Q. AVell, about when? — A. It m'ight have been in February. 

Q. Have you been up there every day since? — A. Xo, sir; sometimes I am sick 
and can't get there. 

Q. How many affidaA'its ch) you suppose you have made? — A. I have no knowledge. 

Q. Have you no idea at all? — A. No, sir; I don't know. 

Q. As many as 50? — A. I don't know, I say. 

Q. As many as 50? — A. I don't know; I couldn't say, A heap of them were already 
made before they knew I was in Muskogee. 

Q. How many thumb marks do you suppose you made in that office? — A. (lod 
knows; I put mv thumb on three times. 

Q. To each affidavit?— A. Yes, sir; I think so. 

Q. You made your thumb mark three times? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many times do you suppose you made your thumb print like that each 
day? — A. I have no idea; the papers will show. 

Q. A number of times each day? — A. The number that have my thumb on will 
show. 

Q. How much did you make a day; how much money? — A. Sometimes I made 
nothing. 

Q. A\'hy? — A. They would promise to pay me, but never did. 

Q. ATTien was that to be paid to you? — A. Some have already paid. 

Q. They have paid you something? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did they promise anything nvtre if they got on the roll? — A. Yes, sir; some of 
them said if they got on the draws they would give me |100, but I wouldn't give 50 
cents for that promise, for I don't think they will get on. 

Q. Are you on the rolls of the Dawes Commission ? — A. Choctaw freedman; yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know your roll number? — A. No, sir; I don't know; I have my deed, 
but I don't know it now. 

Witness excused. 

Lee G. Grubbs, being first duly sworn, on oath states that as stenographer to the 
national attorney for the Choctaw Nation he reported the proceedings in the above- 
entitled case on the 31st day of July and the 5th day of August, 1915, and that the 
foregoing is a true and correct transcript of his stenographic notes thereof. 

(Signed) Lee G. Grubbs. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the 1 0th day of August, 1915. 

[seal.] R. p. Harrison, Cleric. 

(Signed) Bv .\. C. McMillax, Depu^i. 

(Exhibit L.) 

Department of the Interior, 
Office op the Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes, 

Muskogee, Olln., August 6, 1915. 

In the matter of the application of various persons for enrollment as citizens by 
blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

Webster Burton, being first duly sworn by William L. Bowie, deputy clerk for the 
United Stales ('ourt for the Eastern District of Oklahoma, on oath testifies as follows: 

Examination by William L. Bowie on behalf of the superintendent for the Five 
Civilized Tribes: 

Q. Please state your name? — A. Webster Burton. 

Q. Age? — A. Well, you will find my age on those papors there 65, but since that 
time I have looked over the roll book and I am not that old. 

Q. How old are you? — A. I am 59: maybe 60. 

Q. Where do you live? — A. I live in Reeves Addition, Muskogee. 

Q. What is your occupation? — A. Minor work wherever I can find it. 

Q. How are you employed at the present time? — A. I have no regular occupation. 

Q. Are you acting as a witness in enrollment cases being prcpxred by some persons 
working in an office in the Metropolitan Building? — A. I am acting in that capacity, 
but am not employed; am not employed by no one working in the office. 

Q. How long have you been acting as a witness in these cases? — A. Well, I guess 
about throe months, maybe. 

Q. Have you been present every day at the office of these persons — have you been in 
the office every day? — A. Every day? 

Q. Every day? — A. Every day. 

Q. You say you are not working at any regular occupation? — A. No, sir. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1017. IDS 

Q. How are you paid for your services? — A. These parties that como and testify pay 
me for these facts for them. ^ 

Q. How much did they pay you? — A. Just whatever they can, sometimes fifty 
cents, one dollar, and one dollar and a half. 

Q. Who first interviewed vou relative to actina: as a witness? — A. Nail. 

Q. Alec. Nail?— A. Yes, "sir. 

Q. Wliat did Alec t^ll you he wanted you to do? — A. Wanted me to help him with 
the Choctaw people. 

Q. AMiat are the names of the persons gathering this testimony? — A. You want to 
know the names of those claimants? 

Q. ^^'hat are the names of those persons occupying these offices? — A. Lindly. 

Q. Do you know his full name? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Any other person occupying these offices? — A. None but him that I know of. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Mr. Rodky? — ^A. No, sir; never saw him in my life. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Mr. Webster Ballinger? — A. Never saw him in my life. 

Q. Do you know whether Mr. Lindly is employed by Mr. Ballinger? — A. He said 
he was. 

Q. Do you know in what capacity he is serving Mr. Ba,l'linger? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Are any of the persons named connected with the Government service? — A. I 
have not heard say whether any of these gentlemen is attached with the Government 
business or not. 

Q. As a matter of fact, from what these applicants who go up there have said to you, 
don't they seem to think that these men are employed by the Government? — A. Well, 
I haven't heard or even had a person to implicate that to me until yesterday, and that 
was when two parties asked me if old man Lindly was employed by the Government 
and 1 told them I didn't know whether he was or not. 

Q. Is that what you told all of the applicants? — A. There hasn't even one asked me 
that but these two fel,lows, this was the first persons that have asked me such a question, 
that was the first 1 heard of it. 

Q. In what capacity was Nelson Durant serving these persons? — A. Now, I can't 
tell you. Judge, I just only learned that he was an attorney at the bar, but what part 
of the attorney he was playing, I don't know. 

Q. Did he hold a power of attorney? — A. I heard that but I don't know it to be true. 

Q. Power of attorney from whom? — A. I don't know, I can't tell you that. 

Q. Do you know what these applicants paid Nelson Durant? — A. No, sir; I don't 
know if they paid him anything; I don't know it. 

Q. Did you ever hear Mm demand any money from any of these persons? — A. No, 
sir; not a nickel: only what I heard. 

Q. What was it that you heard? — A. One of these two parties was telling me that he 
paid Nelson Durant to take up his applicaticm. 

Q. How much? — A. He didn't say how much. 

Q. I have just had an interview with one of these men that you were seen talking 
to a short time ago, and one of them, Mr. Short, tells me that when he first came down 
here that you are one of the parties that represented to him that you were in the 
Government service. Did you represent that to Mr. Short? — A. No, sir; never rep- 
resented that to him in my life. 

Q. You made (piite a number of affidavits down here? — A. Well, I signed some. 

Q. In Mr. Ballinger's office? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many aflidavits do you suppose you made? — A. I have no idea. 

Q. Were you personally acquainted with all of the persons for whom >'ou made 
affidavits? — A. Was I acquainted with them? 

Q. Were you personally acquainted with them? — A. No, sir; I was not. 

Q. Were you acquainted with any of them? — A. No one; I told them that. 

Q. You had never sc^en one of the persons?— A. No, sir; never seen them. 

Q. Who prepared the affidavits that you signed; who wrote them? — A. Lindly 
typewrote them out. 

Q. Did you tell him what to write in these affidavits? — A. No, sir: I lold him of the 
Indian people I knew. 

Q. Did Mr. Durant have anything to do with the preparation of these aliidavits?— 
A. Well, I am going to speak that the best I know how. Durant wotild fill them out. 

Q. He would write them out with a pencil? — A. Yes, sir; whatever tribe these 
people were he would write it out, and if I knew that tribe he would write it out. I 
gave them all to understand that I didn't know them. 

Q. Did Durant question you himself as to your knowledge? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did Mr. Lindly f|uestion you as to the extent of your knowledge? — A. No. sir; 
he did not. 



104 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

Q. Did he simply write out these affidavits without asking you? — A. He wrote 
ihese afli(hTvits fromjhe questions Durant wrote out from the roll book for the Indians 
on the roll. 

Q. Who wiiuld find them on the roll? — A. Durant or those Indians would take the 
roll book and hnd them., 

Q. After these affidavits were written up on the typewriter by Mr. Lindly, were 
the aflidavits read over to you? — A. Yes, .sir. 

Q. Bv whom? — A. Golden. 

Q. By Golden?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He was a notary public? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. ("an you write your name? — A. Can't write at all, or read. 

Q. You signed these afhdavits by thumb mark? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Will you place your thumb on this blank sheet of paper for the pro])er identi- 
fication of your thumb i^rint? — A. Yes, sir; I can do it. 

Q. Are you acquainted with a person named Jane Driver? — A. No. sir; 1 don't 
know that I am — I don't know. 

Q. Are you acquainted with a person named Harriett Brown, who was Harriett 
Tnrnbull before her marriage? — A. Well, I got acquainted with her when she came 
11]) here to take up her application; was not acquainted with her before. Would not 
know her this morning. 

Q. Were you ever acquainted with a person named Harriett Brown, who was Harriett 
Turnbull before marriage, before she came up to this office? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you ever acquainted with one William Brown, who was said to be a one- 
half blood Choctaw? — A. No, sir; I didn't get acquainted with him. 

I read you an affidavit ])urporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, 
a notary i)ublic, on ^Iay 11, 11)15, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger, which is attached to 
a petition for the enrollment of Jane Driver as a citizen by 1>lood of the Choctaw 
Nation. 

(See application of Jane Driver as to contents of affidavit.) 

Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. I didn't make it in that way. I made that 
affidavit, IJut not to know tliat woman. I knew the man that the woman said was 
lier father. You will find it that way all the way through, l)ut the people themselves, 
I don't know them. 

Q. This affidavit states that you have known the applicant for the last 18 years; 
what ex])lanation have you to make to this? — A. It is wrong. I didn't make that, 
I didn't make that affidavit as to knowing that woman 18 years. I don't know any 
of those people. 

Q. This aliida\it slates further that you knew this applicant's mother, Harriett 
lirown. who was Harriett Turnbull before marriage. — A. I didn't make that. I 
know the Turnhulls, but not the girl. 

Q. Did you rei)resent to any person at the time this affidavit was prepared that 
you had known this ai)plicant for 18 vears and that you knew her motlier, Harriett 
Brown or Harriett Turnljull'.^ — A. I did know a Mrs. Turnbull, but not the woman. 

Q. You just stated to me that you had never seen Harriett Brown or Harriett Turn- 
bull iiefore you met such pcu-son in the office of ^Ir. Ballinger a short time since. — A. I 
sa\s tliat tlie woman wlio this woman says was her mother, that Mrs. Turnbull, well, 
I knew her, but tliat woman 1 didn't know her. 

Q. Why did you stat(; to me just now that you had never known a Hari'iett Brown 
or Harriett Tur"n])uH?- A. As fai as Mrs. Turnbull is concerned, I knew Mrs. Turnbidl. 

Q. Who was this Mrs. Turnbull that you speak of? — A. Mrs. Turnbull; she's a 
Choctaw Avoman. 

Q. Of what blood is this Jane Driver, the applicant in this case for enrollment?— A. 
Well, she snid she was a Choctaw. 

Q. What does she look like? — A. Well, she looks like she had some Indian blood 
in her. 

Q. Did she also have negro blood?- — A. Yes, sir; some negro blood. 

Q. What is her color?-— A. Aboat my color. 

Q. What color are you?— A. I call myself a yellow man. 

Q. Are you usually termed a ginger cake?— A. No, sir. 

Q. You spoke of knowing a Mrs. Turnbull; do you know her given name?— A. No, 
sir; I don't know her given name. 

Q. Do you know more than one Mrs. Turnbull?— A. Joe Turnbull. 

Q. A man? — A. He is a man. I know Ben Turnbull. 

Q. Any others?— A. I think that is about all. 

Q. And this woman you speak of, is she related to Joe and Ben? — A. I think she 
was; I don't know for certain. 

Q. Where do Ben and Joe live; are they living now? — A. They are dead. 



INDIAN APPEOPKIATION BILL, 1917. 105 

Q. Where did they live?— A. They lived up in Kiamichi at that time. 

Q. In what county?— A. Towson Oounty; 1 don't know if that's what they call it 
now; that is the Indian name. I just know the people; I don't know their residence, 
and all that. 

Q. Were Joe and Ben related? — A. Yes, sir; I think they were brothers. 

Q. Well, were they white or colored?— A. They were half-blood Indians. 

Q.What nation?— A. Ohocta-rt . 

Q. What was the other half?- A. White. 

Q. White?^-A. Yes, sir. There are some Turubull negroes. 

Q. You said you knew a woman by the name of TurnbuU, but did not know her 
given name?- — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know that she was related to Joe and Ben? — A. I am not positive; I 
think she was, though. 

Q. Did this negro woman claim to be related to the Turnbulls?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What Turnbulls?— A. She said Joe and Ben were her uncles. 

Q. How did she make that out?- — A. She named same other woman to be the brother 
of those boys, etc., etc.; we didn't go to work to question these people. They asked 
us if we knew such names of Choctaws and Chickasaws. 

Q. You are made to testify in this affidavit that I have read to you that you knew 
these applicants, that is, her mother, Harriett Brown who was Harriett Turnbull before 
marriage; as a matter of fact were you ever acquainted with one Harriett Brown who 
was known as Harriett Turnbull? — A. I was acquainted with a Mrs. Turnbull; I don't 
know her by Harriett Brown; I know her as a Turnbull. 

Q. You jiist stated to me that you knew a woman by the name of Turnbull, but that 
vou did not know whether her given name was Harriett, — A. Yes, sir; I know a 
Turnbull. 

Q. But you do not know whether she was ever a Brown? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you knowingly testify that you knew this applicant's mother, that her name 
was Harriett Brown who was a Harriett Turnbull, before marriage, and that she was 
a full-blood Indian? — A. I didn't testify that. 

Q. You say this affidavit was read over to you? — A. Well, we couldn't understand 
half that Jew said. I never said those things that way. 

Q. You never saw this applicant before you met her in Mr. Ballinger's office? — 
A. No, sir. 

Q. What did tliis applicant give you for making this affidavit? — A. She gave me 
$1.50. 

Q. Where were you born? — A. In Red River County, Choctaw Nation. 

Q. ^^■hat towns were in that county? — A. Why we didn't have no principal town 
only old Shawneetown. 

Q. Shawneetown is low Idabel? — A. Shawneetown is about 3 or 4 miles from 
Idabel. Idabel is the post ottice and Shawneetown is a little place. 

Q. How long did you live in that County? — A. Red River County? 

Q. Yes. — A. I lived there from birlh up until I was about 23 or 24 years old. 

Q. Where did you go then? — A. I ramified around in Texas some. 

Q. How long were you in Texas? — A. About 5 or 6 years and then I came back to 
Shawneetown. 

Q. How long did you stay there? — A. I disremember how long, I moved to South 
McAlester and stayed there 5 or (i years. 

Q. Then wliero "did you go fromthere? — A. 1 moved from McAlester to tlie Chick- 
asaw Nation. 

Q. What part of the Chicka.saw Nation?— A. This side of Milburn one miU' and a 
quarter. 

Q. What year did you go down there? Do you know?^A. No, sir. 

Q. How long did you live at Milburn? — A. I stayed down there I guess about 12 
years as near as I can remember. 

Q. Where did you go then? — A. I came up here in the Creek Nation. 

Q. Where in the Creek Nation? — A. My first stop in the Creek Nation was at Tulsa. 

Q. How long did you stay in Tulsa? — A. Twelvemonths. 

Q. Wlien did you leave Tulsa? — A. Can't tell you the date, sir. 

Q. About when?— A. Well, I can't say just exactly. I came to Coweta. 

Q. How long did you stay at Coweta?— A. I think about two years. 

Q. Wiiero did you go from Coweta? — A. To Wybark. 

Q. How long were you in Wybark?— A. Three years. 

Q. Wybark is just a few miles nort of liere? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Wiiere did you go next? — A. Red Bird. 

Q. How long did you live at Red Bird? — A. Two years. 

Q. Wliere did you go next?— A. Muskogee. 



106 INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 

Q. Have you been here ever since? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did you come to Muskogee? — A. I came here in December. 

Q. December hist?- — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. Have you ever been in the penitentiary? -A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever been in jail? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many times have you been in jail?- — A. I can't tell you. 

Q. A number of times?^ — A. Several times. 

Q. What wore you charged with?- — A. Whisky and fighting. 

Q. Whisky .'telling? — A. No. sir. 

Q. Introducing?^ — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. What were you charged with?— ^A. Just charged with a little whisky. 

Q. Charged with introducing and selling? — A. No, sir. I never sold any whisky 
in my life. They found wliisky on me when I was about 18 years old. 

Q. Have you ever been in jail in Muskogee County?- — A. No, sir. 

Q. Tulsa "County?— A. No, sir. 

Q. What counties were you in jail? — A. I have been in jail at Fort Smith and 
Tishomingo. 

Q. You have never been in the penitentiary?— A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever been charged with felony? — A. What is that; I don't know what 
you mean; what are you talking about? 

Q. That is a penitentiary offense. — A. No, sir. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Mary Reeves?- — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where does she live?- — A. She lives 5 miles east of Vian. 

Q. About how old a woman is she?— A. She says she is about 50 years old. 

Q. Did you make an affidavit for her in Ballinger's office? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long had you been acquainted with her when you made this affidavit? — 
A. How long? 

Q. Yes.— A. Well, now you done hit a pretty hard proposition in this case. Mary 
Reeves is a half sister of mine and T never saw Mary Reeves until she carne up here, 
but I had heard of this girl from a little thing on, but T never saw her until she came 
right down there. She introduced herself to me and told me about all her people. 

Q. I understand you now that the first time you ever saw her was when you made 
this affidavit? — A. Yes, sir; but I had heard of her. 

Q. What did you know about her parentage? — A. About which? 

Q. Her parentage. — A. Her parents? 

Q. Yes; who was her father? — A. Sam Murray; she claimed he was her father. 
After eman(ij)ati(m he taken the name of Sam Burton and if that be true that was her 
father and my father. 

Q. Who was her mother?— A. Cordelia Hampton, and that being true I know her 
mother. 

Q. Of what blood was Sam Murrav or Burton? — My father, he was a freedman and 
part Mexican. Her mother was a Choctaw woman. 

Q. You mean Cordelia Hampton? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. W'hat degree of blood? — A. Well, she was, I guess, a full blood, I guess. 

Q. Were you acquainted with her? — A. I have seen her more times than I got 
fingers and toes. 

Q. '\Aniere did she live?— A. About 17 or 18 miles southeast or west from Sha^^•nee- 
town. Near Red Hill. She is dead. 

Q. Was this woman and your father ever married? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You are positive of that? -A. Sure, .she was an Indian and he was a darkey, and 
that was slave time. 

Q. Did this Cordelia Hampton ever marry? -A. I don't know whether she did or 
not. I was small and she was a growTi, so I don't know. 

Q. \\lio was her father? -A. I can't tell you, sir. 

Q. What do vou know about this api)licant being a daughter of Cordelia Hampton?— 
A. I don't know only what she tells me aliout me; I dcm't know anytlaing about that 
case any more than what she said, Init if the man she represents being her father, it 
is my father. She shows to be an Indian by her hair and eyes. 

Q."^ If your father was of colored blood and this woman, Cordelia Hampton, was of 
Indian blood, how do you account for the fact that this applicant is her child? — A. I 
don't accoiint for it at all. I am just gi^■ing what she told me, that is all 1 am account- 
ing for. 

X}. You do not know anything about it? — A. No, s'lr. 

Q. Have you any reason to believe or disbelieve her statements? — A. No, sir; 
because she presented this about herself, nobody asked her about it. 

I read you an affidavit ])ur])orting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, 
a notarv public, on May W, 1!)15, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with the petition 



IKDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 107 

for the enrollment of Mary Reeves, n^e Hampton, as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw 
Nation. 

(See athdavit attached to petition of May Reeves.) 

Q. Did vou make this affidavit?— A. No. sir; I didn't make it that way. I didn'l 
do it. Lon. Mike, and Julius is the sons of old man Isaac Ham])ton. and not the 
children of Cordelia, and this is the way I save it in. too, and if that man wrote it that 
way you just as well as burn it up. 

Q."That is the trouble; there will be no burning up, Webster.— A. I am going to 
give him the devil. I done heard about this before. If that lady was not in here 

Q. ^^^lat did you hear?— A. I heard that he spoke this way on the application, that 
we knew these claimants. 

Q. \Mio do you mean? — A. I mean Lindly; we gave him to understand that we 
didn't know these applicants and had never seen them before. 

Q. So in the particular application here you do not know whether this applicant is 
a child of Cordelia Hampton or not? — A. I'don't know. 

Q. You do not know who her father or mother was? — A. Onlv by what she said. 

Q. How much did this applicant give you for making this affidavit?— A. She hasn't 
given me nothing \et. 

Q. Well, she promised you something if she got through?— A. Yes, sir. I says well 
if you get through as you are my sister. I don't charge you nothing, and I would be 
glad if she did get throush. 

Q. Did the other applicants promise vou any money if their application went 
through all right— if they were enrolled?— A. None but that one who was supposed to 
be mv sister and another one. 

Q. 'What did the other one promise you?— A. She said she would give me double if 
she got through. 

Q. You told me not long ago in our conA'ersation that some of them had promised 
\ou §100 if their applications for enrollment went through?— A. Yes. sir; some of 
them did that. 

Q. Some did promise you SlOO?— A. Yes, sir; SlOO if they went through. 

Q. Was this promise rnade in the presence of any other person?— A. None except 
me and Nail. 

Q. What did Durant get out of this?— A. I don't know if he got a nickle; I can't 
tell you. He might have 2;ot 81,000; I can't sav. 

Q. Are you acciuainted with Annie Abernathy? — A. Yes. sir: I am a little bit 
acquainted with her. 

Q. Where does she live? — A. On the other side of the M. O. t^- G. 

Q. In Reeves addition? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did you first meet this Annie Abernathy''— A. \\c\\ I met around about, 
I never met her wntU. I came here. 

Q. Before you came to Muskogee to live? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you came here about 5 months ago? — ^A. I came here in December. 

Q. \\hat was this woman's name before she married? — A. I tell you I don't know 
nothing about that woman's name, I know her as Abernathy. 

Q. You do not know what her name was before she married? — A. No. sir. 

Q. Do you know who her ]uirents were? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know who claimed to be her mother? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know any Tysons? — A. ( hoctaws: yes, sir. 

Q. Where do thev live? — A. Near Boggy, near Double Springs. 

Q. Know any one named Tom Tyson?— A. A\hy, I didn't know an Indian by the 
name of Tom, but I know a nigger. 

Q. Know a Sam Tyson? — A. Yea. sir: I have met him. 

Q. You do not know whether either one of those persons was the father of this 
woman? — A. No, sir: I don't know. 

Q. Do you know a Caroline Tyson? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know a Caroline Frazier? — A. Well, yes; I know Caroline i'razier. 

Q. Do you know whether she married a Tyson? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether Caroline I'^razier was the mother of this a])i>licant? — 
A. No, sir; 1 don't know^ whether she is the mother or not. but she said so. 

I read you an affidavit puri)orting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, 
a notary 'i>ublic, on May (i, 1915, filed by Webster Ballinger with the api)lication for 
the enrollment of Annie Abernathy, nee"Frazier, as a citizen by l)lood of the Choctaw 
Nation. 

fSee affidavit attached to petition of Annie Abernathy.) 

Q. You state that you do not know whether Caroline Frazier, now Tyson, was the 
mother of this woman? — A. I sure do, sir; I don't. 

Q. Does Annie Abernathy appear to be of negro blood?— A. Xot a bit; there aint a 
drop of negro blood in her. 



108 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

Q. Does she live with the negroes?- — A. Yes, sir: chily and huvfully married to 
one, so she says. 

Q. Is she a mulatto? — A. She is about my color, mayl)e a little blacker. 

Q. And what do you say your color is? — A. I call myself a yellow man. I ain't no 
ginger cake. 

Q. What makes you say that she does not appear to have negro blood? — A. She 
ain't got no features whatever of a colored person; it is white and Indian. 

Q. But as far as you know she might have negro blood in her? — A. She might, as 
far as I know. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden 
on May 28, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with the application for the enroll- 
ment of Willis S. Taylor as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

(See affidavit attached to petition of Willis S. Taylor.) 

Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. I made it in part, sir. 

Q. When did you first meet this applicant? — A. Right here at this building. 

Q. When? — A. I can't tell you what month. 

Q. The day you made this affidavit? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know anything about this applicant's ancestors? — A. I don't know any- 
thing about his ancestors, but the Taylofs, I know them. 

Q. Who did he say his father was? — A. Sam Taylor. 

Q. Who was Sam Taylor? — A. An Indian man. 

Q. Where did Sam Taylor live? — A. Sam Taylor, I can't do that 

Q. Do you know Sam Taylor yourself? — A. I knew Sam Taylor, from time to time, 
at Wheelock. 

Q. Was he a full blood? — A. No, sir; he didn't look like a full blood. 

Q. Did he have negro blood in him? — A. No, sir; not a bit. 

Q. Did this applicant have the appearance of having negro blood? — A. Not a bit. 
He didn't have any negro in him. 

Q. Did he appear to be a white man? — A. White and blood Indian. 

Q. Do you know whether he lived with the negroes? — A. No, sir; I don't know. 

Q. You never met him when you were working as a deputy marshal? — A. No, sir. 

Q. That statement, then, in this affidavit, is false? — A. Yes, sir. He spoke about 
that and tried to make me know him as a United States marshal, biit I didn't. 

Q. Were you ever a United States marshal? — A. Posseman. 

Q. You do not know whether this applicant belonged to the C'hitto Harjo Band? — 
A. He said he did; I don't know. I know I did. 

Q. The statement contained in this affidavit that you have known the applicant 
for 35 years is false? — ^A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Also the statement that the applicant had his home where his father did and was 
considered and recognized as a Choctaw Indian is also false? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. As far as yoiir knowledge goes? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did you get for making this affidavit? — A. $2.50. 

Q. Were you promised any more? — A. Not a bit. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Thomas Goings? — A. Tom Goings? I am acquainted 
witli the Indian Goings. Yes; I am acquainted with Thomas. 

Q. Do you know where he lives? — A. No, sir; I don't. 

Q. Did' you make an affidavit in Mr. Ballinger's office identifying Mr. Thomas 
Goings? — A. I have made no affidavit identifying a soul in Mr. Ballinger's office. I 
haven't did it and never will. 

Q. Did yoii make any kind of an affidavit identifying the Goings ?^A. I have. I 
did. I made an affidavit knoA\'ing some of the Goings. 

Q. What Goings?— A. The Goings I knew are dead, and I told them at the time they 
were dead. Lelius Goings and Old Tom Goings— I know some of the Goings. 

Q. What Lelius and Tom Goings were they?— A. Well, I don't know. 

Q. Where did they live?— A. "^ They lived now— Tom lived near Doakville, in 
Kiamichi County. 

Q. Where didLelius Goings live? — A. I just knew Lelius as I find him. I didn't 
know where be lived; he was a drinking man; I have met him at various places lots of 
times, but not having anything to say to him. 

Q. Where is Doaksville?—7V. Way down here. 

Q. Near Shawneetown?— A. Fifty miles tliis side of Shawneetown. 

Q. Did you ever know William Goings ?^ — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Thomas Goings?— A. Yes, sir; 1 know of these boys, but it has been years ago; 
those men were men when I was a boy. 1 didn't have no dealings with them. 

Q. Did you know a woman named Delltha Goings? — A. No, sir. 

I read you an aflidavit puiported to have been made by you before Julius Golden, 
a notary public, on June 15, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with his application 
for th(> enrollment of Thomas Goinijs as a citizen bv blood of the Choctaw Nation. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1017, 109 

(See affidavit attached to petition of Thomas Goings.) 

Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. Part I did, and part I didn't. 

Q. You recollect this applicant, Thomas Goings, do you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Didhehave the appaarance of having colored blood? — A. No, sir; he was a white 
man . 

Q. A white man? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he have the appearance of liaving any Indian blood? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What degree of blood did he look to be? — A. About one-quarter. 

Q. You say you never met him until you made this affidavit in Mr. Ballinger's 
office? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You did not know his father amd mother? — A. No, sir; only what he said. 

Q. You do not know whether he is related to William and Delitha Goings then 
or not? — A. No, sir; only what he said. 

Q. You do not know whether he was a member of the Snake band? — A. No more 
than what he said. 

Q. You do not know why he was left off of the roll or whether he made application ? — 
A. No, sir; he said he didn't. 

Q. Was this affidav^it read over to you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Why did you make your thumb mark on an affidavit containing facts not within 
your personal knowledge? — A. Well, the fact of the business, we didn't half under- 
stand that Jew in his reading, and further, we were not studying about this at all. 

Q. Do you understand the nature of an oath? — A. No, sir; I don't. What is it? 

Q. You know what it means to swear to tell the truth? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You were sworn to these papers? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You know there is a severe penalty attached to false swearing? — A. Yes, sir. 
I have heard that and I am here to tell you that that there was things put in there we 
never put there. 

Witness excused. 

Webster Burton, recalled on August 6, 1915: 

Q. Are you acquainted with Angie Flanagan? — A. Jvist right down here to the office. 

Q. You met her first in Mr. Ballinger's office? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you make an affidavit for her? — A. Yes, sir; I think I did. 

Q. Was that the day you met her? — A. Yes, sir; the first time I ever saw her. 

Q. What did you testify to for her? — A. Well, we taken up the kind of Indian she 
said she was and the names of those Indians; why. If I knew them Indians from the roll 
I would testify that I knew that. 

Q. Well, who was her father? — A. I couldn't tell now. 

Q. Who was her mother? — A. I don't know that now. They would call the names 
and I would testify to those people's names. 

Q. You do not know of your own personal knowledge that the persons she claimed 
were her father and mother were her father and mother? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You say Mr. Lindly wrote out on the typewriter all the affidavits you signed? — 
A. Yes, sir; he wrote every one I signed. 

Q. Did you tell Mr. Lindly that you were well and personally acquainted with 
the father of this woman? — A. Who was it that she claimed was her father and mother, 
I told him I was acquainted with them. 

Q. Do you know a Ruth family? — -A. No, sir; I don't know no Choctaw Ruths. 

Q. Does this family claim to be Chickasaw? — A. Chickasaw, I think; Choctaw or 
Chickasaw. 

Q. You do not know which nation this Ruth woman claimed to be a member of? — 
A. No, sir; I don't. 

Q. Did you ever know a Thomas Ruth? — A. No, sir; I don't know a Ruth. 

Q. Did you tell Mr. lindly that you were well acquainted with this woman's 
father and that his name was Thomas Ruth? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever know a deputy marshal by the name of Ruth? — A. Nope; I don't think 
I did . 

Q. Did you tell Mr. Lindly that this woman's father was a deputy marshal? — A. 
No, sir; I ain't told Mr. Lindly that anybody'.s father was a deputy marshal. 

Q. Do you know a llarri.fon woman? — A. I know some Indian Harrisons. 

Q. What nation do they belong to? — A. They were Choctaws. 

Q. Do you know whether this worn in claimed that her mother was a Harrison?— 
A. Yes, sir; she claimed that her mother was a Choctaw, that is what she claimed. 

Q. You do not know that her mother was a Harrison? — A. Yes, sir; she claimed 
she was a Harrison. 

Q. Do you know a Harrison woman? — A. Yes. sir; I know one or two. scarcely, just 
met them. 

Q. Did Mr. Lindly question you about them? — A. He asked me if I knew them. 



110 INDIAN APPKOPKIATION BILL, 1917. 

Q. And he wrote this af^ida^^t after he questioned yon? — A. Yes, sir; and I told 
liini I didn't i)ersonally know these Uirrisons. 

Q. Wlaat was the given name of one of the Harrisons you knew? — A. Joe. 

Q. Any others? — A. Ben. 

Q. You just know two Harrisons, Joe and Ben? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were Joe and Ben rehited? — A. I couldn't tell; I guess they were though. 

Q. You do not know? — -A. No, sir; I couldn't tell you. 

Q. You do not know whether either one of these persons named were related to 
this applicant? — A. No, sir; I don't know whether they is or not. 

Q. Did you ever know a Sloan Harrison? — A. I have heard of him; never met him 
in my life. 

Q. Simply know of him? — A. Yes, sir; heard of him. 

Q. What did you hear? — A. Why I heard he was a Choctaw, full-blood, and that he 
was a pretty bad man. 

Q. Where did he live, do you know? — A. Couldn't answer that question as to just 
where he lived; I couldn't answer that properly. 

Q. Did you tell Mr. Lindly that the mother of this applicant was one of the Harri- 
sons? That her name w^as Anna, and that she had her own home on the public domain 
the same as did her father who was known as Sloan Harrison together with his wife, 
the gi'andmother of this applicant who claimed to come from Mississippi? — A. No, 
sir; I don't know where they come from; I didn't tell that. 

Q. Did you go on then and tell Mr. Lindley that they lived unmolested as Choctawa 
until the time of their allotment and that their names had not been placed on the roll 
and they lost out and other Indians filed on the homes that they had made? — A. No, 
sir; they told that themselves. 

Q. Did you tell Mr. Lindley that the father, James Ruth, was a statesman? — A. 
No, sir; because I don't know nothing about it. 

Q. That the mother was a resident of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations and 
claimed to be a Choctaw by blood? — A. No, sir; they told that, old man Nail told 
that. 

Q. You did not tell Mr. Lindly that?— A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you make this affidavit? Did you place your thumb mark on it? — A. 
(Witness examines affidavit as to thumb mark.) I guess I must have made it. 

Q. Was the affidavit read ovei to you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who read it to you? — A. Golden. 

Q. Did you understand it? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you not understand that you were swearing to those facts? — A. I told 
Golden I didn't understand them. 

Q. Did Golden swear you to that? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he read it over to you? — A. Yes, sir; he read it. 

Q. As a matter of fact did you care what they had in the affidavits? — A. (Witness 
does not answer.) 

Q. How much did you get out of this, for making this affidavit? — A. I haven't got 
a fighting cent. 

Q. How much was ])romised you? — A. One dollar, but they never paid it. 

Q. Did you care what facts were contained in the aflida^its just so you got your 
money? — A. No, sir: I don't want to say that berause I do. 1 find those affidavits 
were not made exactly like I swore to. There is an a^lida^it that 1 told those men I 
didn't know anything about those people [indicating ailidavit of his in case of Angie 
Flanagan]. 

Q. i)id you ever ha^■e any conversation with Mr. Lindly about these affidavits? 
Did he give you to understand that he wanted you to testify to these facts whether 
they were or were not within your personal knowledge? — A. 1 tells Mr. Lindly this: 
If there is a fraud in this, 1 don't want to fool wath it, but if it is square and true it is all 
right. The Indians I knew I testified to, but the Indians I didn't know I wouldn't 
swear to. 

Q. What do you think of this, do you think it is a fraud? — A. I don't know, I 
couldn't tell you. I seen into this business a long time ago and saw it was a fraud. 

Q. A\"hat was that? — A . This blood-right business, several years ago, and I saw it was 
a fraud. 

Q. What were you trying to do, get on the roll as a citizen by blood? — A. Y''es, sir; 
Choctaw by blood. 

Q. Is this Angie Flanagan of colored blood? — A. Yes, sir: full of it. 

Q. You can tell that by her appearance? — A. Y'es, sir; tell it from every thing. 

Q. What color is she? — A. Some of you say bay, and if you use that word she is that 
color, she is a dark brown skin woman. 

Q. Do you know Emma Jones, n^e Ervin? — A. Where does she live? 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. Ill 

Q. She ia given in the application as living at Vian. — A. Yes, sir; I have met 
Emma Jones. 

Q. Where did you get acquainted with her? — A. In Mr. Balliuger's oflice. 

Q. Did you make an aflidavit for this woman?— A. Yes, sir; for the tribe of Indians 
she claimed she was. 

Q. Did you get accjuainted with her the day you made the affidavit? — A. Yes, sir; 
the first time I ever saw her. 

I read you an alfidaAit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, a 
notary public, on May 23, 1915. filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with petition for the 
enrollment of Emma Jones, n^e Er\TJi, as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

(See atFidavit attached to petition of Emma Jones, n6e Ervin.) 

Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. Yes, sir; I didn't make it knowing the Ervin 
family, thovigh. 

Q. Y'ou did not make it knowing the Ervin family?- A. Not until she came up to 
the office. 

Q. You took her statement for the facts to which you testified in the affidavit? — A. 
Yes. sir. 

Q. Yor. did not know of your own i)ersonal knowledge? — A. No, sir; I swear to God 
I didn't, the Indians she said she claimed to belong to I said I knew them and I do 
know them. 

Q. You do say that you know the Ervin family?— A. Y'es, sir. 

Q. Do you know Joe Ervin?— A. Y"es, sir. 

Q. Where did Joe live? — A. At that time he lived in Towsoii County. 

Q. Near what place? — A. Well, I guess, as near as I can. recollect now 

Q. Did he have a brother? — A. I don't know whether Columbus is brother or not. 

Q. What relation was Columbus to him? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Did you testify in this affidavit that Columbus was a brother of Joe? — A. No, 
sir; I didn't testify that; I testified that I didn't know they were l)rothers but knew 
who they were. 

Q. Did they claim this applicant had a daughter? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is her name? — A. I don't know now, I don't know. 

Q. You met the daughter down here in Balliuger's office? — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. Was she %vith the'applicant? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was her name Evergreen Reeves? — A. Y'es sir; that is it, Evergreen Reeves. 

Q. Was this applicant, Emma Jones, nee Ervin, a woman of negro blood? — A. If 
she has a drop of negro blood in her. Judge, 1 couldn't see it; I don't think you could 

Q. What did she claim to be?— A. Full-blond Choctaw. 

Q. Didn't look like .she had any negro blood in her? — A. No, sir; she didn't. 

Q. I exhibit to you a photograiih attached to this affidavit and ask you to state who 
slie is? — A. That is the old lady's daughter, Evergreen Reeves. 

Q. How about the daughter, did she look to have negro blood in her? — A . She might 
have had a little, but it don't show much. 

Q. Shows it some, though? — A. Shows a little negro blood. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Lizzie Campbell, n6e Lenox, nee Brown? — A. I don't 
know whether I am or not. Who is she? 

Q. She states she is 53 years of age and lives in Muskogee. — A. I am not sure. If I 
heard who she said her Indians are — I can't think of all those people's names that 
came u\> tliere. 

Q. You can not place this woman now? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know whether you made an affidavit in Ballinger 's office or not?— 
A. I don't know whether I did or not. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Ciolden, 
a notary public, on April 24, 1915, tiled by Mr. Webster Ballinger with the petition 
for the enrollment of Lizzie Campbell, n<;e Lenox, nee Brown. 

(See affidavit attached to petition of Lizzie Campbell, nee Lenox, n^e Brown.) 

y. Did you make this affidavit? — A. Yes, sir; I made it. 

Q. Were the facts contained therein witldn your j^ersonal knowledge? — A. Y^es, sir. 

Q. You told me awhile ago that you did not know these applicants? — A. Not until 
I could hear what Indians they claimed. 

Q. Who is Lizzie Campbell".^— A. I knew her from the young woman up until her 
age now. 

Q. Why didn't you know her? — A. I knew her by the name of Lenox. 

Q. How long have you known her? — A. About 30 years; I tlunk that's about right. 

Q. How old a woman is she? — A. Lizzie — I guess Lizzie is 50 or 60 years old, I guess. 

Q. Where did you first get acquaintefl with her? — A. In the Choctaw Nation. 



112 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

Q. What part of the Choctaw Nation?- — A. Up there on Wheelock, V)ut they moved 
from there up to Old Doaksville and Sandy Creek, we called it. 

Q. How old was she when you first got accjuainted with her?— A. Lizzie was a 
young woman. 

Q. Was she a young woman when you got acquainted with her? — A. Yes, sir; about 
groAvn, I suppose; might have been about 13 or 14 or more when I got acquainted 
with her. 

Q. Who was she living with? — A. Some old colored folks. 

Q. Colored folks?— A. Yes, sir; she was with them. 

Q. She is of colored blood herself?- — A. Oh, yes; she has some colored blood. 

Q. Who was her father?^A. I don't know. 

Q. Who was her mother? — A. Mrs. TurnbuU was her mother; I believe it was Mandy 
or J5etsy; one of these women, I think, was her mother. 

Q. Do you know a Betsy Turnbull? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. They were two different persons? — A. Yes, sir; I don't know what relation they 
were. 

Q. You do not know whether they were related or not? — A. No, sir; but I certainly 
know them. 

Q. Did this applicant have any other brothers? — A. Well, she said .she did ; I don't 
know whether she did or not. 

Q. You do not know yourself? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did she have any "sisters? — A. No; I don't think she did, at least, I have never 
heard of them. 

Q. How long have you known her? — A. Just like I told you; I have been knowing 
Lizzie every bit of that time. 

Q. How long did you say you have known her; how long has it been since you got 
acquainted with her? — A. About 30 years. 

Q. And have known her ever since?- — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where do you say she was liAdng? — A. Down in Choctaw Nation, near "\Mieelock. 

Q. How long has she lived there? — A. I don't know. 

Q. You lost sight of her? — A. Yes. sir; heard she was li\dng on Sand Hill Creek. 

Q. How long did she live on Sand Hill Creek after you first got acquainted with 
her?^ — A. Well, I don't want you to ball me up. 

Q. AVhere did you first find her?— A. Near Wheelock, in the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. How long did she continue to live there after you first got acquainted with her? — 
A. I don't know that. They moved to Sand Hill Creek from "\^Tieelock. 

Q. How far was that from" Wheelock? — A. Let's see now, it might have been 15 or 
17 ndles from Wheelock. 

Q. Do you know how long you knew her at Wheelock? — A. No, sir; I don't know 

Q. Long or short time? — A. I don't know exactly how long. 

Q. Several years?— A. Several years; yes, sir. 

Q. Then you knew she moved to Sand Hill? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long did you know her at Sand Hill? — A. I can't tell how long. 

Q. Several years? — A. I guess it might be; she left there. 

Q. See anything more of her then? — A. Never saw her until she came to Muskogee. 

Q. WTiere did you live?^ — A. Shawneetown. 

Q. How far is Shawneetown from Wheelock? — A. Ten nules. 

Q. Now, you say she left Sand Hill?— A. She left Sand Hill, because I found her 
here. 

Q. When did you lose sight of her? — A. I left her in that country when I left. 

Q. You left her where? — A. Down in the Choctaw Nation near Doaksville. 

Q. Was she at Sand Hill when she left Shawneetown?— A. I guess so. 

Q. You do not know? — A. No, sir; I don't know. 

Q. When did you leave Shawneetown? — A. I can't tell you the date. 

Q. How long ago?— A. It has been a great while; just can't say. I left Shawnee- 
town when I was quite small, young man, and I am about 60 years old now. 

Q. You lost sight of her and never saAV her until you were in Muskogee? — A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. How long before that was it that you met her in ]3allinger's ofTice. — A. That 
was a month. 

Q. Did you see much of her or just meet her once? — A. Just once. I went to her 
house; she" was looking for me to come up. I stayed all night with her. 

Q. With her?— A. With them; you heard wha"t I said. She wanted to talk over 
this business and we stayed up and talked this business over. 

Q. Is she married? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is his name? — A. I don't know. 

Q. How long has she been married to her husband? — A. I don't know. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 113 

Q. Was she married at Sandy Hill? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was his name? — A. Lenox something. 

Q. AA'as Lenox his given or surname? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Was Lenox her first husband? — A. The first I knew anything about. 

Q. Wliat became of Lenox? — A. He died. 

Q. How long has he been dead? — A. I couldn't tell. 

Q. Did she marry after tliat, before she married this man she is living with now? — 
A. Not that I know of; I lost sight of her. 

Q. You know that she is the same woman you knew at Sandy Hill? — A. Yes, sir; 
I would swear tliat. 

Q. What do you know of her being of Choctaw blood? — A. Now you have got me; 
I know what she says. 

Q. I am asking you of your own personal knowledge. — A. I don't know of my 
own personal knowledge. 

Q. You do not know anything about her Choctaw blood? — ^A. No, sir; I donjt 
know, but it looks to me 

Q. Does she look to be over one-half negro? — A. She looks to be over one-half 
Indian. 

Q. What is her color? — A. She aint quite as fair as you are. 

Q. Is she a mulatto? — A. I guess you might call it that, between mulatto and 
Indian. 

Q. Then she looks to have negro blood in her? — A. She don't look like she has a 
drap of niggar in her. 

Q. What color is her husband? — A. He is as black a negro as you ever saw almost. 

Q. You testified in this affidavit here that you knew the ancestors of Lizzie Camp- 
bell. Do you know what the word ancestors means? — A. Ancestors means her 
relatives, don't it. 

Q. The persons from whom she descended. — A. Is that what it means? 

Q. 'NMio did you say her mother was? — A. I didn't say who her mother was. You 
wouldn't let me tell you what she said. I was just telling you the Indians what I 
knew. 

Q. You really don't know anything about her parentage, then? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know that her motlier was a Brown, nee Turnbull? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know who lier father was? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Wlio was old William Turnbull; did he have any daughters? — A. I don't know 
whether he had or not. 

Q. Do you know whether he had a daugliter by the name of Lizzie, or Elizabeth? — 
A. I don't know; she says she was liis daughter. 

Q. Do you know that he had a son named Joe? — A. Yes, sir; he had a son named Joe. 

Q. Wlio was the father of Joe? — A. Old man — oh, let's see — if I don't forget his name 
now; I know him as good as I do myself. Yes; he had a son. 

Q. Was there a Turner Turnbull? — A. I don't know whether there was or not; there 
miglit have been. 

Q. Was there a Levi Turnbull? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Wlio was he? — A. I don't kncnv. 

Q. Was there a Dan or Daniel Turnbull? — A. Yes, sir; there was a Daniel. 

Q. Do you know who Daniel's father was? — A. No, sir; 1 don't know, really. 

Q. Do you know whether Daniel and Levi are related? — A. No, sir; I don't. 

Q. Do you know Simeon Turnbull? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether Simeon and Daniel are related? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Who was Simeon's father? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Know who Daniel's father wa.s? — A. No, sir; I don't really know; it has been a 
long time since I have been among those people. 

Q. Do you know Turner Turnbull? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is he living or dead? — A. I couldn't .say. I think he is dead. 

Q. How about Simeon? — A. They all of those fellows are dead. 

Q. Did you testify in this affidavit that Simeon and Turner Turnbull are living?— 
A. No, sir; I don't tliink I did; there is an old Simeon and a young Simeon. I testi- 
fied I knew the old Simeon. 

Q. Where i^ Gates Creek? — A. That is the name where this family lived. 

Q. Did you know this woman when she lived on Gates Creek? — A. Yes; place 
known as Sand Hill Creek, long ago. 

Q. Did this woman have any children? — A. One dead. 

Q. How old? — A. I don't know how Will is. 

Q. Will is his name? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. WTaen did you first get aquainted with Will?~A. Over there on Gates Creek. 

25134— PT 4—16 8 



114 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

Q. He was a baby then? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was he the child by the last husband? — A. No, sir; the tirst husband. 

Q. What did you get for luakino; this allidavit? — A. Not a nickel. 

Q. Are you acjuainted with Josie L. Arnold? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where does she live? — A. Out in Reeves Addition. 

Q. How old a woman is she? — A. I can't tell how old Josie is; looks like she was 
about 27 or 28 years old. 

Q. Rather a young woman? — A. Seems to be. 

Q. Married? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. WTiat is her husband's name? — A. Arnold. 

Q. What was her name before she married? — A. That is something I don't know 
anything about; why I just met her here. 

Q. You first got acquainted with her in Ballinger's office? — -A. Out there in Reeves 
Addition. 

Q. How long ago? — A. Been about three months ago, I reckon. 

Q. This is the first time you met her to know her? — A. Yes, sir; first time. 

Q. She made application for enrollment in Ballinger's office downstairs? — A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you make an affidavit for her? — A. I guess so. She asked me to help her. 

Q. This woman asked you to make an a'fidavit, did she? — A. Asked me to help her 

Q. You made an affidavit for her? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. WTiat did you testify to? — A. I don't know but only to what Indians she claimed 
through. 

Q. You so not remember who she claimed was her father and mother? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Or who she claimed raised her? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Is she of colored blood? — A. There is mighty little, if any. 

Q. Does she live with colored people? — A. With her husband. 

Q. Is he black?^A. Not quito as black as you ever saw, but black enough. 

Q. Has she any children?. — A. I don't know whether she has or not. 

Q. Did you ever hear her say where she Lived before she came to Muskogee? — A. No, 
sir; I don't think I heard her say. 

Q. How long has she lived in Muskogee? — A. No, sir; I don't know. 

Q. Do you know how long she has lived in the Choctaw Nation? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know who her father was? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know who her mother was? — A. No, sir; only what she said. 

Q. You do not loiow yourself, then?— A. No, sir; I might know if I heard their 
names. 

Q. You (mly know what she said about it; you do not know of your own personal 
knowledge? — A. No, sir; I don't know. 

Q. Did you tes'ify that you first knew this woman when she lived with an old 
colored woman named Aunt ( allie Gr^en? — A. No, sir; I didn't do that. 

Q. Did you ever know a woman named Callie Green?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. But you do not know that this woman lived with her? — A. No, sir, I don't; I 
stated in that affidavit that (allie Green has a little yellow girl, but I don't know 
whether this is the woman or not. 

Q. Where were vou lidng at that time?— A. In the Chickasaw Nation. 

Q. How far from Aunt Callie Green?— A. About 2^ miles from old lady Callie 
Green. 

Q. How long did you live there? — A. I lived around Wiley, around about there, for 
12 years. . , , , 

Q. When was this; how long ago?— A. I couldn't tell you just exactly how long ago, 

Q. Well, about how long?— A. Been about 18 or 10, maybe 20 years. 

Q. How old was this little girl that you spoke of?— A. This girl was a little small 
girl; I don't know whether this is the girl or not; she says she is. 

Q. You do not know whether this little yellow girl that you spoke of would be about 
the age of this a!)])licant?— A. Well, not probably, the girl might of been; I don't know 
foe truth; I don't know. 

Q. Was this little y(dlow girl the daughter of Aunt Callie Green?— A. No, sir. 

Q. Whose daughtc^ was it? — A. I don't know. 

Q. How old was she when you went there?— A. I don't know; might of been 5 or 6 
years old . 

Q. Do vou know who her father was? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know anything about her relatives?— A. No more than what she says. 

Q. Who says? — A. TMs applicant. 

Q. You do not know whether this girl that was living with Aunt Callie Green was 
the child of Sofia Kemp?— A. I don't know no Sofia Kemp; I don't know no Sofia 
Kemp. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1911. 115 

Q. You do not remember a woman named Sofia Kemp, a full-blood Chickasaw ■ 
woman? — A. No, sir; I don't. 

Q. Do you know a Jackson Kemp? — A. Yes, sir; I know him. 

Q. But you do not know whether Jackson had a daughter named Sofia Kemp? — A. 
He might of had, but I don't know. 

Q. Who was Benjamin Kemp? — A. I know him, but I don't know what family he 
belonged to. 

Q. What relation was Joel Kemp to Benjamin Kemp? — A. I think — I don't know 
it to be true, but I think tliev were brothers or first cousins. 

Q. Some difference in that? — A. I know that. 

Q. You do not know whether Benjamin or Joel Kemp had a sister named Sofia 
Kemp? — A. No, sir; I heard Nail say so. 

Q. You heard Nail say so? — A. Yes sir. 

Q. You do not know that yourself? — A. No sir; know nothing about that sister. I 
never gave it, for I don't know it is so; you can just scratch it out. 

Q. Now you did not testify to this before Julius Golden as knowing it did you? — A. 
This woman you talk about being the sister of those boys, knowing that I say I didn't. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden 
a notary public, on June 22, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with the petition 
for the enrollment of Josie L. Arnold as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. How much did vou receive for making this affidavit? — A. $2.50. 

Q. Who paid you the $2.50?— A. That girl. 

Q. Did you make an agreement with her before you made the affidavit that she 
was to pay you $2.50 to make the affidavit? — A. No sir; I didn't make no agreement; 
she asked me what I charged, and I told her I would leave it to her, and she said 
she would pay $5. 

Q. W^iat went with the other $2.50? — A. She gave it to Nail. We sure needed it, 
and we need it until yet. 

Q. What did Durant get out of this? — -A. I have not seen Durant get a nickel. 

Q. How much did Golden get?— A. $2. 

Q. Did you see her pay it to him? — A. I guess so; I handed it to him. 

Q. She gave it to you, and you handed it to him? — A. Yes sir. 

Q. She must have had more than $5? — -A. She gave me $5 for myself and brother 
Nail, anfi I gave him half, and she gave me $2 to give to Golden. 

Q. Did you tell her what Golden charged? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How din you know what he charged? — A. My God, I am right there all the time. 

Q. Did Golden have any regular charge? — A. Regular charge was $2. 

Q. No matter what he did? — A. No matter what he did, it was $2; that was his price, 
and I argued it, and he said it was low. 

Q. Why did you argue it? — A. Thought it was too much. 

Q. Did Golden do any work on these affidavits except his seal on them and sign 
them?— A. That is all. 

Q. Mr. Lindly wrote them all out? — A. He did. 

Q. Did Mr. Lindly get any mone>? — A. Not a nickel. 

Q. Not so far as you know? — A. No, sir; and I have heard him tell people they 
couldn't pay him a nickel. 

Q. Why?— A. They couldn't do it. 

Q. Did he claim he was in the Government ser\'ice? — A. No, sir; he said he was 
working for Webster Ballinger. 

Q. Did he say Webster Ballinger was in the Government service? — -A. No, sir. 

Q. Did Durant claim to be in the Government service? — A. I never heard him say. 

(Witness excused.) 

Lee G. Grubbs, being first duly sworn, states that, as stenographer to the national 
attorney for the Choctaw Nation, he reported the proceedings in the above-entitled 
case on the 3d and Gth days of August, 1915, and that the foregoing is a true and correct 
transcript of his stenographic notes thereof. 

(Signed) Lee G. Grubbs. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 21st day of August, 1915. 

R. P. Harrison, Clerk. 
(Signed) By A. G. McMillan, Deputy. 

(Exhibit M.) 



116 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

Department op the Interior, 
Office of the Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes, 

Muskogee, Okla., July SO, 1915. 

In the matter of ihe enrollment of various persons as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. 

'\^^ M. James, being first duly sworn \>y "Willian L. Bowie, deputy clerk of the 
United States court for the eastern district of Oklahoma, on oath testifies as follows: 

Examination by AVilliam L. Bowie on behalf of the superintendent for the Five 
Civilized Tribes: 

Q. AMiat is your name? — A. "V\'illiam James. 

Q. Have you any middle initial? — A. "William M. James. 

Q. You sign your name W. M. James? — A. AV. M. James. 

Q. What is your age? — A. I was born in 1846. 

Q. Are you a citizen of any of the nations? — A. No, sir; I was born and raised in 
Kentucky. 

Q. You are not enrolled as a freedman then? — A. No, sir. 

Q. V, here did you say you were bona? — A. In Kentucky. 

Q. In what county? — A. Washington County; Springfield is the county seat. 

Q. How far did you live from Springfield? — A. Three miles north. 

Q. How long did you live there? — iV. Until I was 20 years old. 

Q. Then where did you go, William? — A. I went from there to Louisville and 
worked on a boat from Louisville to New Orleans. 

Q. How long did you run on the boat? — A. I run on the boat during 67, 68 and part 
of 69. 

Q. Then where did you go from there? — A. Came out here. 

Q. From there to Muskogee? — A. To Indian Territory. 

Q. "\A'here did you live in the Indian Territory? — A. I stopped around Fort Gibson. 

Q. How long did you stay there? — A. I got work in the survey gang for the Katy in 
70 and worked on the road to Denison, Tex. 

Q. IIow long did you work with the survey party? — A. I worked with it until they 
got through and then helped them to grade into Parsons. 

Q. How long were you in Parsons? — A. I didn't stay there over 3 or 4 days. 

Q. A\'here did you go then?^ — A. I worked on the railroad until it was completed. 
I drove a supply wagon. 

Q. From Parsons down to Denison? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did you next settle down? — A. I stopped in Denison in 1872; they com- 
pleted the road in 1872, and I stopped in Denison until July, 1873. 

Q. Then where did you go next? — A. Came back to Muscogee. It had just started 
to build. 

Q. and have you resided here continuously ever since? — A. Ever since; I have not 
been out of town for years. 

Q. Have not been out of town? — A. No, sir, not 20 miles away. 

Q. You have not been 20 miles away from Muskogee?- — A. No, sir; to stay any 
length of time, since 1873. 

Q. Areyouacquainted with one Jackson Barrett? — A. No, sir; I am not acquainted 
with Jackson Barrett. 

Q. You say that you are not acquainted with Jackson Barrett? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever live at Boswtll?^A. No, sir. 

Q. Never resided there? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever been in Boswell? — A. I have. 

Q. Ever stay there any length of time? — A. No, sir; I used to go to Boswell while 
running over the country in the early day buying cattle for cattlemen. 

Q. Are vou acquainted with Thomas Hunter? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Witli Silas Hunter?— A. No, sir. 

Q. With Nelson Hunter?— A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you ever acquainted with Toliver Barrett? — A. No, sir. 

Q. With Francis Barrett?— A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever know Billy Hunter? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You never knew any of the Choctaws? — A. No, sir; was not very well acquainted 
with them. 

Q. Did you know any of the Choctaw freedmon?— A. No, sir. None of the Choc- 
taws and Chickasaws, but I knew the Creeks and Cherokees. I drove a mail hack all 
through here. 

Q. 1 will read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you and bearing 
your thumb print acknowledged to before Julius Golden, notary public of Muskogee 
County, Okla., under date of March 13, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with the 



INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL, 1917. 117 

application for the enrollment of Jackson Barrett et al. as citizens by blood of the Choc- 
taw Nation, which is as follows: 

"That he is well and personally acquainted with the applicant; that he first knew 
him at Boswell, Okla., about 20 years ago. 

' ' That he has always known that h is mother was one of the Huntt r family and that he 
was well and personally acquainted with her brothers, Thomas Hunter, Silas Hunter 
and th(^ oldest one that died long time ago, Nelson Hunter; that were ail Choctaw In 
diaus and that the said Thomas Hunter run for governor at the last election that the 
Choctaws had. 

■'That the applicant is now living at Haskell, Okla., where he moved a short time 
ago; that prior to that time I knew him in the Chickasaw Nation and first and most 
in the Choctaw Nation. 

■'Affiant further stated that the applicant went to Texas and stayed for a while, 
but this was after 1900; that wherever I have known him he has always been recog- 
nized as a descendant of the Hunter family, his mother having been tlie sister of the 
above-named Hunters, and as a Choctaw citizen. 

"(Signed, by thumb mark.) W. M. James." 

Q. Did you make this affida\dt? — A. I don't think I did that — for a Choctaw. 

Q. You deny that you ever made such an affidavit? — A. Yes, sir; for a Choctaw. 

Q. You do not know the Jackson Barrett named in this application? — A. No, sir, 
I don't know nothing at all about that, for I was not acquainted with that Choctaw 
family at all. 

Q. You are not acquainted ^\ith that Choctaw family at all? — A. None of the 
Choctaw families at all. 

Q. You do not know any of the members of the Hunter family named in this pe- 
tition'? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know the applicant or any of his ancestors? — A. No, sir. 

Q. His father, mother, sisters, or brothers? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Julius Golden, who executed this affidavit? — A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Is he a notary public? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Will you make your thumb mark on this blank sheet of paper, so we can com- 
pare it with the thumb mark in the affidavit which I have just read to you'? — A. Yes, 
sir. 

(Thumb mark of witness attached hereto.) 

Q. Did you ever appear before Julius Golden and make an affidavit in any matter 
at any time? — A. For the Creeks, I have. 

Q. You mean that you made some affidavits as to the identity of some Creeks? — 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. \Miere did you make these affidavits? — A. Down here in Lindly's office. 

Q. In Mr. Lindly's office? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where is that located'i" — A. In the Metropolitan Building, on the second floor. 

Q. In the same building with the Indian Agency? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You speak of Mr. Lindly, do you know his initials?— A. Matt, I think they call 
him. 

Q. Matt Lindly?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is Mr. Lindly's business? — A. Well, I don't know; he said he was sent 
here by the Government to enroll the Creeks who were left off. 

Q. You say that he was sent here by the Government; that is what he said? — A. 
Yes sir; that is what he said. 

Q. Did Mr. Lindly tell you this himself? — A. No, sir; he was not talking to me 
direct, but I heard him talking to others. 

Q. In his office? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did he say as to these other persons in his exact words, as you remember? — 
A. Well, I can't tell — I was not paying very much attention to the matter. He 
said that all the cases he got up that went through he got pay for, and if they didn't 
he got nothing. 

Q. What is that, now? — A. He said all the cases he got up that went through is the 
way he got his pay, but if they didn't go through he didn't get nothing. 

Q. In what official position was he? — A. I don't know that; I couldn't tell that. 
It seems that Ballinger, at Washington — he was up there and Mr. Lindly was at this 
end taking care of it. Mr. Ballinger paid the office rent. 

Q. Mr. Lindly said that Ballinger was paying the office rent? — A. Yes, sir; I saw 
a check from him. 

Q. Who was the check signed by? — A. Ballinger. 

Q. Can you sign your name? — A. No sir. 



118 INDIAN APPROPEIATION- BILL, 1917. 

Q. Can you read? — A. No sir. 

Q. Do you remember the names of the persons for whom vou made affidavit in 
Mr. Lindly's office? — A. I do. 

Q. Name as many as you can. — A. I remember Lucy Smith, a daughter of John 
Jefferson. 

Q. Is she a Creek? — ^A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Freedman? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Any others, Bill? — A. Well, yes, sir; but they don't come to my mind now. 
There were several. 

Q. 'Well just name those that you remember. — ^A. Mrs. Anderson, who lives at 
Tulsa, the daughter of Joan Hodges. 

Q. All right, go ahead. — A. Well, I don't think I can remember any more. 

Q. ^\'ho prepared the affida\'its for yotir signature in the cases you just mentioned? — 
A. Mr. Lindly; you mean who typewrote them off? 

Q. I mean who prepared them? — A. Durant; he did all the writing. 

Q. How did he write them — with a pencil? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. \\hat did he then do with them? — A. He carried them to Mr. Lindly. 

Q. What did Mr. Lindly do with them?— A. Mr. Lindly taken them and typewrote 
them. 

Q. Mr. Lindly used the typewriter? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who wi^ote tlie affidaA-it you signed? Mr. Lindly? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. After Lindly wrote the affidavit what was done with it? — ^A. It was sworn to 
before Mr. Golden. 

Q. Was Golden in the same office? — A. No, sir; he was across the street, but he 
would come up there. 

_ Q. Were the affida\dts you signed read to you? — A. Sometimes they were and some- 
times not. 

Q. Did you make your thumb mark on any affidavits without having them read 
over to you?^ — A. I don't know as I did; I might have, but I wouldn't be positive 
about it. 

Q. You can not be positive about it? — A. No, sir; but I don't think tliey were 
all read to me. 

Q. Who read those to you that were read over? — A. Mr. Golden and sometimes 
Durant. 

Q. Sometimes Durant? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you paid anything for making those affidavits? — A. No, sir; I was not paid 
anything; not until they got it through, outside of a little expense money. 

Q. You were not paid anything? — A. No, sir; not until they got it through, except 
my little expenses. 

Q. If the men got these cases through what were you to receive? — A. I was to get 
$25 a head. 

Q. You were to get $25 a head? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who promised you that? — A. The ones that were making the applications. 

Q. Did Mr. Lindly or Durant, or anyone else, sanction that? — A. No, sir; they did 
not sanction that at all; the applicants that were making applications if they got 
through were to pay the witness fee. 

Q. How did the applicants come to promise you $25?— A. For making a witness for 
them. 

Q. Did you ask the witnesses to agree to pay you $25 for acting as a witness for 
them? — A. I asked them what they would allow me for making it— for helping them 
through. 

Q. You exacted that? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you tell these persons that you would act as a witness for them if they would 
give you $25? — A. No, sir; I asked them what they would give me. 

Q. And they said in each case they would give you $25?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You said just now, James, that you were to have your expenses paid; who agreed 
to pay yoiu" expenses? — A. The ones who were making applications gave me 50 cents. 

Q. Were you told to get all you could out of the witnesses? — A. No, sir; I was never 
told that. 

Q. You were never told that? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know Perry Rodkey?— ^A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was he connected with this office down stairs? — A. No, sir. He was not here; 
he was at Okemah. I met him once or twice around town here. 

Q. Have you ever seen Mr. Ballinger? — A. No, sir; I did see him once at Hickory 
Ground. 

Q. When was that ?— A. I think it was in 1909. 

Q. What is Mr. BalUnger's official po.sition? — A. I don't know. 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL^ 1917. 119 

Q. Were you ever given to understand what his official position was? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Was It represented to you bj' any person that he was in the Government service? — 
A. No, sir; not more than that he was in this enrolling business like lindly is now. I 
don't know that he was connected with it any more than that he was taking care of it 
in Washington; that is what they say; I don't know. 

Q. You understand, then, that these persons down stairs are working under Mr. 
Ballinger? — A. Yes, sir; they are in his employ. 

Q. Did you understand what these persons were receiving; whether they were 
getting a '^alary? — A. No, sir; I don't. They said if the cases were not good they didn't 
get anything out of it, but if the cases were good, they got their salary. I only heard 
Mr. Lindly say this. 

Q. ^\hat work did Nelson Durantdo? — A. Well, he done like this gentleman here 
ia doing all right [indicating stenographer]. 

Q. Did he question persons as they came in? — A. He taken them off to himself and 
they would have a talk. 

Q. Did you ever hear him talking to any of the persons? — A. I never did hear them; 
he would shut himself in the other room. 

Q. AMiat did Durant tell you about what he was doing, or the position that he held? — 
A. Well, he claimed to be the attorney, and they were paying him; he got money all 
the time. 

Q. Got money from whom? — A. From the applicants. 

Q. Did you see any of the applicants give him any money? — A. Yes, sir; yes, sir. 

Q. How much did he charge the applicants? — A. Well, all kinds of prices, $25, $30, 
$40, and $60. 

Q. You say he charged from $25 to $60?^A. Yes, sir. I didn't see this, but I heard 
another party say he got $60. 

Q. You say he got all he could out of the applicants? — A. Yes, sir. I heard one 
person say that when he signed up he gave him $50. 

Q. Do you know who that person was? — A. No, sir; but I think it was William 
Thompson that told me about it. 

Q. Do you know where he lives? — A. No, sir; I don't. William Thompson was a 
witness in that case but he said he did not get anything out of it. 

Q. Did Nelson Durant ever represent himself to be a Government official? — A. No, 
sir. 

Q. Not that you know of? — A. No, sir; not that I know of; he claimed to be working 
under Mr. Lindly. 

Q. Were you ev-er paid any money, or given anything of value, by any person con- 
nected with this office down stairs? — A. No, sir; never was. 

Q. All you received then was what you procured from the applicants? — ^A. Yes, sir; 
from the applicants. 

Q. Did you demand from the applicants any certain amoiSnt? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You did not tell each one of the applicants what to pay you? — A. No, sir; only 
what they agreed to give me if they got through. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Jurdean Smyers? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who is this person? — A. Supposed to be a Creek Freedman. 

Q. Man or woman? — A. A man; the one I know. 

Q. Where does he live? — A. Used to li\'e southwest of Okmulgee. 

Q. How far? — A. Used to live out between Wewoka and Springfield. 

Q. You say this person was a Creek Freedman? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Enrolled? — A. No; he was enrolled. 

Q. Do you know whether this person was enrolled? — A. No, sir; if he was he would 
not be making application. 

Q. ^^■hcn did you first get acquainted with this person? — A. 1 got acfiuainted with 
his people in 1883. 

Q. \\'ho was his father? — A. John Smyers. 

Q. Who was his mother? — A. I don't know now; I can't remember now. 

Q. Did you ever know a woman by the name of Jurdean Smyers? — A. I can't get 
that name. 

Q. Well, did you know any other person ?— A. I knew a woman by the name of 

Julius Myers. 

Q. Where does she live? — A. She used to live on Little Deep Fork. 

Q. Where is little Deep Fork; what coimty?— A. In Okmulgee County. 

Q. Is she an Indian?— A. Well she is f»ne-half blood; used to live at Coweta. 

Q. ^^^lat nation now? — A. Creek. 

Q. What is the other half? — A. Colored. 

Q. Negro? — A. Yes, sir. 



120 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BIL].^ 1917. 

Q. Did you know the parents of this person? — A. Yes, sir. George Myers is her 
uncle. 

Q. Do you know a Choctaw Indian by the name of Jurdean Smyers? — A. Yes, sir; 
used to 1)0 woman that lived at Wewoka. 

Q. This Smyers? — A. That is the same woman. 

Q. Did she have a Creek man? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Ever live at Durant?- — A. She said she did; yes, sir. 

Q. Did you ever live at Durant? — A. I worked there some years ago, but she used 
to live at Wewoka. 

Q. She lived at Wewoka? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Whore does she live now?^ — A. I don't know, sir. 

Q. When did she live at Durant? — A. I don't know when she lived there. 

Q. What direction did she live from Durant? — A. I don't know. 

Q. When was the last time you saw her? — A. I haven't seen her for four or five 
years, until she came here. 

Q. Came where? — A. Here in town. 

Q. When did you see her here? — A. On the streets. 

Q. Did you identify her in this office down stairs?^A. Yes, sir; I identified her. 
Alec Nail showed her to me. 

Q. Alec Nail showed her to you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is that the first time you had ever seen her? — A. For a good while. 

Q. Where had you seen her before that? — A. Wewoka. 

Q. You saw her in Wewoka? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Wewoka is in the Seminole Nation? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What were you doing in Wewoka? — A. I used to drive the mail hack. 

Q. What was she doing there? — A. She used to live there, or close to Wewoka. 

Q. She lived close to Wewoka? — A. Yes, sir; right on the line of the Creek Nation. 

Q. How far from Wewoka? — A. Lived about 7 miles, north and west. 

Q. Seven miles, north and west? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was she married? — A. She was living with a fellow; I don't know whether she 
was married or not. 

Q. Who was the fellow? — A. Caesar Bowlegs. 

Q. Was she white, Indian, or colored? — ^A^ I don't know; I suppose part Indian. 

Q. What part?— A. One-half. 

Q. And of what Indian blood? — A. Choctaw. 

Q. How do you that she is one-half blood Choctaw Indian? — A. She said she was. 

Q. She told you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is all you know about it?^ — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You don't know her father or mother? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You never knew her brothers or sisters? — ^A. No, sir. 

Q. The first time you ever saw her was at Wewoka? — A. Yes, sir; that was the 
first lime. 

Q. Never saw her anywhere else outside of Wewoka? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Not until she came here? — A. No, sir; I never knew what became of her until 
bLo came here. 

Q. Do you know where Blue River is? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where is it? — A. In the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. Where? — A. About 7 or 8 miles below Caddo — no, sir; Blue Kiver is between 
Caddo and Atoka. 

Q. Did that woman ever live on Blue River? — A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Uiixo you ever been on Blue River? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. l"'or some time?--A. Yes. sir; several times. 

Q. Did that woman have a husband that you know of on Blue River? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know anything about her children? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever know a man by the name of Aaron Smyers? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know whether Aaron Smyers is her husband? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether this woman's mother's name was Pusley? — A. I don't 
know that. 

Q. Do you know whether her father's name was Ed Givens? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever know an Ed GiA'ens, a Choctaw? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Where is Gatesville? — A. I don't know exactly. 

Q. You do not know where this place is? — A. I don't know. 

Q. You don't know whether this woman is living there now or not? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Where is Beeland? — A. Eleven and one-half miles southwest of Muskogee. 

Q. Did you cAer live there? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did you live there? — A. I have lived there ever since 1899. 

Q. \N'here is your home now?— A. That is my home. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATrON BILL, 1917. 121 

Q. You are an inmate of the county jail now, are you? — A. Yes, sir, 

Q. What crime are you charged with? — A. Check. 

Q. What is the charge against you? — A. Identifying a check; identification. 

Q. Is the charge for false pretense? — A. Yes, sir. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you on April 15, 1915, 
before Julius Golden, notary public, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger writh the petition 
of Jurdean Smyers for the enrollment of herself and family as Choctaw Indians: 

"W. M. James, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 70 years of age and 
that he lives at Beeland, Okla. 

"That he first became acquainted with the applicant about 15 years ago; at this 
time she was living with her husband on Blue River about 8 miles from Durant; that 
they only had two children when he first knew her; her husband was named Aaron 
Smyers. 

"That he was not personally acquainted with the mother of the applicant, but that 
he knew about her; her name was Pusley and she was said to be a full-blood Choctaw. 

"That he did know her father; his name was Ed Givens; I don't know how much 
Choctaw blood he was; he was just considered a Choctaw Indian the same as the 
other (^hoctaw Indians that lived there in that part of the country, 

"That he knows that she now lives at Gatesville and that she has lived thtre for 
several years; that he has seen her children but does not know them personally. 

"(Signed, by thumb mark) W\ M. James," 

Q. What do you know about this affidavit? — A. I don't remember making that; 
I don't know about it. 

Q. Does this affidavit refresh your memory any? — A. No, sir; not a bit, it is a fraiid. 

Q. As a matter of fact, James, did you ever see this woman before Alec Nail intro- 
duced her to you? — A, I took her to bo the same woman. 

Q. You took her to be the same woman? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you know that she was the same woman? — A. She told me she was the same 
woman. 

Q. ^^^lat did you say her name was? — A. Bowlegs, at that time. 

Q. You knew her by the name of Bowlegs? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You didn't know her by the name of Smyers? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you know her by the name of Smyers until Alec Nail introduced you? — A. 
No, sir. 

Q. What was her maiden name? — A. No, sir; I don't know. 

Q. You say you are charged with identif^'ing a man on a check? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What check was this? — A. Mike Mcintosh's boy's check. 

Q. I have talked with you about this check transaction before and it apjiears that 
you entered into a conspiracy to falsely identify a certain person, that you brought 
such person to this office and identified him as being the owner of a check which had 
been issued in payment of Creek equalization money due him, when you knew that 
this party was not the owner of the chock; is not thai the case? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You took this man down to the l:)ank and identified him there as being the 
owner of the check when you knew such was not the case? — A. No, sir; I didn't know 
that; I knew Mike Mcintosh had a son. 

Q. Well, you told me the other day that he was not the owner of the check? — A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Malissa Marcy? — A. No, sir. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius (lolden, 
a notary ])ublic, on March Hi, 191.5, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with the ]ietition 
for the enrollment of Malissa Marcy and her family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw 
Nation: 

"W. M. James, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 70 years of age, and 
that he lives at Beeland, Okla. 

"That he first knew the applicant near Bowell in the Choctaw Nation; that she is 
the daughter of Malissa Birdsong, who was Malissa Sanders before she married Bird- 
song. 

"That the said Malissa Sanders was a Choctaw Indian by blood and was always 
considered threo-qiiarters; that I also know her brother, William Sanders, and the 
whole Sanders family, and they were all Choctaw Indian. When I first knew them 
they were living on Sans Bois River, but when I last knew them they were living 
down on P.lue Piiver. 

"The mother died down there on Blue River; I knew the father, Willie Birdsong, 
l)ut don't know where he died; he was a half-breed Choctaw who was placed on the 
Freedman roll over his protest. 



122 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

"That he was well acquainted with the first husband of the applicant, his name was 
Tony Carroll, and they separated; I knew about the family, but not well enough to 
identify them; I know the man she lives with now at Boley, Okla., his name William 
Marcy. They have a boy that lives with them now, about ]4 years old 

"(Signed, by thumb mark) W. M. James." 

Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. I may have made this affidavit, but I didn't 
see those people at all. Nail came to me and told me there was a woman who had been 
here and said I knew her. She had been here and gone. Nail told me who she was 
and I remembered seeing her at Porum once. 

Q. You took his word for it? — A. Yes, sir; I remember making the affidavit. 

Q. You did not know anything about it yourself? — A. No, sir. 

Q. YoTi took his word that she was a Choctaw by blood? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Mary Ross? — A. Yes, sir; she lived at Haskell. 

Q. Do you know who her father was? — A. No, sir; this another one's of Nails, I 
don't know anything about her. 

Q. Did you see her down here? — A. Yes, sir; seen her after she had made affidavit. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius Golden, a 
notary public, on ]\Iarch 9, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with the petition of 
jMary Ross for enrollment of herself and child as Indians by blood of the Choctaw 
Nation: 

" W. M. James, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 70 years of age and 
that he lives at Beeland, Okla. 

"That he knows the applicant and knows where she was born, and that he has been 
to the house and eat there with them ; this was near where Atoka is now; affiant further 
states that he knew her until her mother took her away to Oklahoma City ; that was after 
her father died and when she was a girl ; 

"I also knew her father, William Fulsom, and was well acquainted also with his 
brother. Dr. Fulsom. I knew of other })rothers that he had and know that all of 
them were Choctaw Indians and were so considered, and considered as full bloods by 
most of the people. 

"Her mother, Fannie Fulsom, lived with her said father, William Fulsom, until 
he died. 

"I bought cattle from both William Fulsom and Dr. Fulsom. 

"Affiant further states that he also knew the applicant when she lived in Oklahoma 
City mth her said mother; that her mother run a boarding house there. 

"I have not known her since until she moved to Haskell, Okla. 

"(Signed by thumb mark) W. M. J.\mes." 

Q. What d^ you know about this affidavit? — A. I bought cattle from those people. 

Q. Did you make this affida\'it? — A. I made this affidavit just like Nail — I know 
the people who are called there. 

Q. Did Golden read the affidavit to you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You took Alec Nail's statement for all of this? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You do not know her father or mother? — A. No, sir; only these men for whom I 
bought cattle for in the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. Do you know whether she is a Choctaw or not? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Alec Nail got you to do this? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you paid anything? — A. No, sir. 

Q. What "did Alec promise you? — A. He said they would pay. She said if they got 
through, each would get $25. Nail said this; I never spoke to her about it at all. 

Q. Do you know what the notary, Julius Golden, was paid? — A. Everyone I seen 
gave pay for it — 75 cents for the one who made the application and 50 cents for each 
witness. 

I read you an affidaAdt purporting to have been made by you before Julian Golden, 
a notary "public, on March 25, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with petition for 
enrollment of Henry Logan King for the enrollment of himself and family as citizens 
of the Choctaw Nation. 

"M. W. James, being first duly sworn, states that I am 70 years of age and live at 
r)eeland, Okla. 

"That he is personally acquainted with the applicant and that he has known him 
since 1886; he has been living at McDermot, Indian Territory, at that time and was 
a barber; I have met him off and on ever since that time; I got acquainted with him 
when I was carrying the mail from Okmulgee to Wewoka and we changed horses 
at ]\IcDermot and I got well acquainted with him. 

"He has been in Okmulgee for the last past 4 years that I know of, and when he 
move there he told me at t^he time that he came i'rom Ardmore. 



INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL, 1917. 123 

"I know from him that he lived in the Choctaw Nation where his people all lived, 
near Heavener. 

"Affiant further stated that he was well and personally acquainted with his father, 
who is the son of Old Man King, but whose Indian name was Li-sha-tubbe. I knew 
the boys and they took the name of King; the two youngest ones, Will and John, went 
to the war and joined a Kansas regiment. I have seen both of them since the war. 
Will came back to the Choctaw and stayed and John stays in Kansas part of the time 
and in the Choctaw Nation part of the time. 

"All the Kings were full blood Choctaw Indians and lived near the Arkansas line 
in what was then Scully ville County. 

"(Signed by thumb mark) M. W. James." 

Q. Did you make that affidavit? — A. I made that affidavit. 

Q. What do you know about the parents of Henry Logan King?— A. I knew him 
well and he said he was the son- 

Q. You did not know anything about his parents?— A. No, sir. 

Q. Is he a negro?— A. No, sir, white and Indian, you can't hardly tell him from a 
white man. 

Q. You don't know whether he has Choctaw blood or not? — A. No, sir; he is nearly 
white, he has black hair and eyes. 

Q. Who is Webster Burton? — A. He is a colored fellow staying around here. He 
is a Choctaw. 

Q. Is he on the rolls? — A. Yes, sir; he a Choctaw freedman. 

Witness excused. 

Lee G. Grubbs, being first duly sworn, states that as stenographer to the national 
attorney for the Choctaw Nation; he reported the proceedings in the above entitled 
case on the 30th day of July, 1915, and that the foregoing is a true and correct trans- 
script of his stenographic notes thereof. 

[seal.] (Signed) Lee G. Grubbs. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 3d day of August, 1915. 

R. P. Harrison, Clerk. 
(Signed) By A. G. McMillan, Deputy. 

(Exhibit N.) 

power of attorney. 
State of Oklahoma, 

County of Okmulgee, ss: 

No. 398; number of claimants, 7. 

I, Ellen Thomas, n^e Walker, one-eighth Creek by blood, hereby constitute and 
appoint Webster Ballinger, attorney at law, of Washington, D. C, my true and law- 
fid attorney for me and in my name, place, and stead, to take all lawfid steps by him 
deemed necessary to secure for me and my minor cMld, Charley Thomas, born Octo- 
ber 15, 1893, Essie Thomas, born June 19, 1895, Inez Thomas, born December 8, 
1896, Millie Thomas, born March 30, 1900,Verra Thomas, born April 20, 1902, Louisa 
Thomas, born April 16, 1904, all living. I am a daughter of Amy Walker, who is a 
granddaughter of Holata and Mary Fixico, full-blood Creek Indians, and both died 
before enrollment. Their son, Watley Dowing, deceased, was enrolled as a full- 
blood. Creek roll No. 2272, * * * our separate indi^-idual property riglits as 
Creek Indians in the common property of the Creek Nation, situated in the State of 
Oklahoma, and to secure our separate enrollment on the final citizenship rolls of said 
nation; hereby conferring upon my (our) said attorney full power and aulhority to 
verify and petition in my (our) names * * *^ to receive and receipt for in my 
(our) name * * *^ or in the name * *- * of my (our) child * * *, any 
drafts, warrants, or other papers issued in payment of said claims, and to do and 
perform all and every act and thing whatsoever requisite and necessary to be done 
in the premises as ftdly and to all intents and purposes as I, or we, might or could 
do if personally present at the doing thereof, with full power of substitulion and 
revocation. I (we) hereby confirm all that my (our) said attorney, or his substitute, 
may or shall lawfully do or cause to be done by A-irtue hereof, hereby annulling and 
revoking all former powers of attorney or authorization?. 

(Signed.) Ellen Thomas, nee Walker, 

Okmulgee, Okla. {post-ojjice address). 



124 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 191*7. 

State of Oklahoma, 

County of Okmulgee , ss: 

Before me, a notary public in and for said county and State, on the 9th day of 
May, 1914, personally appeared Ellen Thomas, nee Walker, to me known to be the 
identical person who executed the Avithin and foregoing instrument by * * * 
mark, in my presence and in the presence of C. House and C'hester Harris, as wit- 
nesses, and acknowledged to me that * * * executed the same as * * * free 
and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purjDoses therein set forth. 

Witness my hand and official seal the day and date above written. 

Arthur G. Wallace, Notary Public. 

(Exhibit "O.") 

Laredo, Tex., September .3, 1915. 
Honorable Department of the Interior: 

Here is a letter of a friend of mine stating something about my father. Will Grayson, 
a soldier of the United States Army, but has deceased this life and has a bounty due 
him ; and if this is true please let me hear from you, and here is the letter. I hav>- a sis- 
ter at Beggs, Okla. I remain, 

W. W. Gray-son. 



Muskogee, Okla., August 31, 1915. 
Mr. W. W. Grayson. 

Dear Friend and Brother in Christ: This leaves me and my family well; hope 
when these few lines reaches you it may find you well — you and the rest of your dear 
family. I am in the city of Muskogee writing this morning at W. A. Rentie's liouse. 
They are all well and send their best regards to your family. Pay, W. W. , I was called 
into th(> Government office yesterday in question of your whereabouts. I told the de- 
partment man I did not know right then, but would try to find you. Then he showed 
xne the papers whijch made him inquire about you to me. It is this: Your father's pen- 
sion is here for you, and his bounty money amounts to several thousand dollars, and he 
asked me to have you come to Muskogee, whqre you can be identified, and then they 
would pay you over the money at once, but they will not pay it to anyone else. Now, 
that is the whole truth about this matter. I am working with the United States 
department in the enrolling of those citizens' children that did not get any lands; 
so you see I am n(>xt to all kind of business. Now, if you don't want this money you 
must say so in your letter to me; then 1 will report the facts to the department ; then 
they can do the next thing. Now, Brother Grayson, there isn't any trouble at all for 
you in the least way, so write me when you can come and I will go and help you out in 
getting your money. I will meet you at your sister's or your mother-in-law's on 
Salt Creek. I am living in Sapulpa for a while with my wife. I will also put ( harlie 
on tlie roll and he will draw $2,000.80 in money, as he did not get any land. Write me 
to 507 East Hobson, Sapulpa. Okla. 
Yours, 

W. M. Vann. 

(Exhibit"?.") 



Webster Balling er. Attorney at Law, 

Muskogee, Okla., November 14, 1914. 

Dear Sir: Agreeable to the promise I made your committee, I wrote Mr. Ballinger 
a long letter, setting out what you had said, and asked him for instructions, and the 
following is a copy of his letter in reply thereto: 

" I suggest that you have the represtnitatives of the Cherokee freedmen prepare a 
list of the claims they represent, showing upon what roll and roll number the names 
of the claimants appear, and furnish this list to you with an affidavit of the party 
that he or she is the identical person whose name appears on the Dinin or Kern- 
Clifton roll or whatever roll or rolls the names appear upon. If the name appears 
on more than one roll, have each roll set out. Let them get every case in this shape 
and then turn them over to you to be rechecked. 

"Upon that showing I will try and secure legislation authorizing an investigation 
of these claims." ' ^ 

If your committee concludes to accept this proposition, I would suggest that you 
get together and prepare a blank that will cover the different rolls, with the neces- 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 125 

sary affidavit included and have same printed, as there should be at least three copicg^ 
of each one. 

Will be glad to give you any assistance along this line that I can if you will call 
at the office. 

Yours, very truly, 



(Exhibit Q.) 



(Exhibit R.a) 

Mr. Ferris. Oklahoma has no corneT on crooks and thugs that 
are trying to tear open those rolls. 

Mr. Norton. What is the. Indian Bureau doing about it? Why 
don't they investigate? 

Mr. Ferris. They have some men there on the job, and some of 
their men took these photographs. I wish you would take time to 
read what these negroes say when they were asked why they signed 
these affidavits. Some deny it, some got $7.50, some got $2.50, and 
some got $1.50. Some replied, ''No, sir; we don't swear for the 
Choctaws; we swears for the Cherokees." 

Now, let me go into the McLaughlm report, which deals with — 
I merely mention that because it happened this summer, to show it 
is not ancient history. 

Mr. Norton. Was this gotten up by the Indian Bureau ? 

Mr. Ferris. It was, and sent to me this morning. 

Mr. Norton. Those witnesses claim they don't know anything 
about what they swore to ? 

Mr. Ferris. Their answers are that some of them got $7.50, and 
some of them $2.50, and some of them got $1.50, and when ques- 
tioned about it, they replied, "We never know nothing about those 
people. We just signed because Alec Nail told us to." Alec Nail 
is 72 years old, a negro as black as your hat, a professional witness. 
Some of them have gone to the penitentiary. The others all have 
numbers and have been to the penitentiary. 

Now I hold in my hand the McLoughlin report, three years old. 
Every Congress was harassed with this thing under one guise this 
year and under another guise next year, but all the time there was a 
subterranean influence underneath it all, somebody trying to enrich 
their pockets, some shyster and unprofessional attorneys trying to 
get something out of the Indians. It ourfit to be stopped. 

Let me show you what Ballinger and Lee claim they will get if 
this enroUment legislation goes through. They claim they have con- 
tracts covering unconscionable attorney fees. They are so large 
as to astound anyone's sense of justice. These are the figures of 
Attorney Lee himself over his own signature. 

o Omitted in printing. 



126 INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 

Lee''s proposed sale of 40 per cent of Ms individual shares, or fee, is figured as follows: 

2, 051 persons. 
$3, 000 Value of individual share. 



$6, 153, 000 Total value of shares of 2,051 persons. 
40 per cent basis of fee. 



2, 461, 200 Estimated fee. 
487 persons. 
$3, 000 \'alue of share. 



$1, 461, 000 Total value of shares of 487 persons. 

12i per cent basis of fee of Ballinger & Lee. 

$183, 023 Total estimated fee of Ballinger & Lee for 487 persons. 

1, 200 persons. 

$500 Ballinger & Lee's fee per person. 



, 000 Total estimated fee for 1,200 persons. 
>, 461. 200 
183, 023 
GOO, 000 



13, 244, 223 Total of Ballinger & Lee's fee. 

Less 150, 000 Estimated expense of collection. 

13,094,223 

45 per cent with which assistance was contracted. 



$1, 392, 400 Estimated cost of assistance. 

|3, 094, 223 Net fee. 

Less 1, 392, 400 Cost of assistance. 

2) $1, 701, 823 Net fee to Ballinger & Lee. 



850, 911 Net fee to Lee. 

40 per cent proposed assignment. 



$340, 364 Fee which will go to owners of the 40 per cent to be sold. 

This is over his signature. He is trying to sell these contracts 
all over the country down there. He is trying to sell them in the 
chairman's district; he is trying to sell them in Mr. Hayden's dis- 
trict; he is trying to sell them in your district, so he can get somebody 
to back-fire you and got your support in this thing because some con- 
stituents of yours have some stock in this Oldahoma Development Co. 

I will also insert the McLaughlin report, showing the various 
activities in Mississippi on this enrollment matter. Maj. McLaughlin 
is one of the oldest and most trusted inspectors in the service. The 
committee and the Congress are entitled to Ivnow the facts. They are 
entitled to laiow why this persistent and never-ending noise and 
agitation about the opening of the Indian rolls. There is always a 
reason for everything, but we are not always as fortunate to get the 
cause as in this case. 

(The full report follows:) 



J 



INDIAN APPKOPKIATION BILL, 1917. 127 

REPORT OF INSPECTOR JAMES m'lAUGHLIN. 

Washingtox, D, C, June 29, 1914. 
The Secretary of the Interior. 

Sir: Under departmental instructions of the 13th ultimo, I have 
the honor to report my investigation concerning the representations 
made and methods adopted by certain solicitors in securing contracts 
from individual Indians who claim the right to enrollment as mem- 
bers of the Choctaw-Chickasaw Tribe of Indians, and respectfully 
submit the following conclusions relative to same : 

In my tour of investigation I visited Columbus, Ohio; St. Louis, 
Mo.; Muskogee, Poteau, Wilburton, and McAlester, Okla.; San An- 
tonio and Houston, Tex. ; Lake Charles, Baton Eouge, and New Or- 
]eans. La.; and Gulfport, Miss., inquiring into the matter and inter- 
rogated numerous persons who had knowledge of the representations 
made and methods adopted by the soliciting agents in obtaining 
contracts from the class of claimants referred to. 

From my investigation I ascertained that during the past four 
years several persons have been engaged in soliciting contracts from 
ChoctaW' and Chickasaw Indians and freedmen of those tribes, and 
that one Alexander P. Powell, who claims to be a Choctaw Indian 
and a lineal descendant of one of the parties to the Dancing Rabbit 
Creek treaty of September 27, 1830, has been actively engaged in 
canvassing a large extent of country, chiefly in the States of Ala- 
bama, Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas, in procuring the names of 
unenrolled persons who claim to possess Choctaw or Chickasaw In- 
dian blood, and obtaining contracts from them to prosecute, on a con- 
tingent fee, their right to share in the distribution of the funds and 
property of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; and wdiile, as above 
stated, there were several persons engaged in procuring contracts of 
similar character from unenrolled Indians of these tribes, it appears 
from the record that said A. P. Powell obtained more contracts from 
the class of claimants referred to than all of the other solicitors 
combined, notwithstanding the fact that he did not solicit contracts 
from any of the freedmen. 

I failed to meet this man Powell during my tour of the localities 
in which he has been operating very extensively the past four years, 
and therefore can not speak of him from personal knowledge, but 
have been told by many who know him that he shows a decided strain 
of Negro blood, is large of stature, prepossessing in appearance, 
shrewd and plausible, which, with his posing in the communities he 
visits in soliciting contracts as a very important person, has succeeded 
in arousing great enthusiasm among the people of the localities can- 
vassed by him, and has thus procured contracts Avith little or no 
difficulty from all persons who believed they possessed, or were led 
by Powell to believe they possessed, any Choctaw or Chickasaw 
Indian blood. 

Fiom what I was told by reputable persons at Lake Charles and 
Baton Rouge, La., and Gulfport, Miss., it would appear that said 
Powell w^as interested chiefly in procuring a large number of con- 
tracts, regardless of the ancestry of the applicants, as Mr. Luke W. 
Conerly, of Gulfport, Miss., told me that to his personal knowledge 
Powell obtained contracts from several families the ancestry of 



128 INDIAN^ APPKOPRIATION" BILL, 1917. 

whom as supplied by Powell was absurdly erroneous. It is also 
alleged that Powell took contracts from any persons claiming to 
have Indian blood, and from many who had never claimed to pos- 
sess Indian blood until told by Powell that they were descendants of 
Indians who were parties to' the Dancing Rabbit Creek treaty of 
1830 and therefore entitled to certain benefits under that treaty. 

Mr. C. R. Cline, an attorney of Lake Charles, La., and Hon. Isaac 
C. Boyd, of Leesville, La., also an attorney, a member of the present 
Louisiana Assembl}^, and who claims to possess Choctaw Indian 
blood, both informed me that there are about 300 persons living in 
the neighborhood of Kinder, Allen Parish, La., who are of mixed 
descent, being of French, Spanish, Portuguese, and Negro blood, with 
a very few of them possibly possessing some Indian blood, and the 
name " Red Bone " was given those of them who were supposed to 
have any Indian blood ; that prior to Powell's visit to Kinder solicit- 
ing contracts with Indians it was regarded a great insult to be 
called a " Red Bone," thus classing them as of Indian blood, but a 
number of them were advised by Powell that they were of Choctaw 
descent, as shown by a book which he possessed and by which he 
traced their ancestry, as eligible to enrollment, and it is alleged that 
he thus obtained contracts from all of them, and since Powell thus 
recognized those people, the name " Red Bone " is no longer objec- 
tionable, but, on the contrary, all are desirous of being thus classed, 
and to be now called a " Red Bone " is exceedingly pleasing to each 
and all of them, as they believe that the cognomen fixes their status 
as of Indian blood, and entitles them to share in the property of the 
Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. 

Hon. Isaac C. Boyd, of Leesville, Vernon Parish, La., above re- 
ferred to, stated to me that in 1911 he was induced by one Mrs. Ella 
TaA'lor, of Leesville, La., to enter into contract for Mississippi-Choc- 
taw rights, said Mrs. Taylor representing herself an authorized 
agent of A. P. Powell and Luke W. Conerly, whose headquarters 
were then at Gulfport, Miss., engaged in obtaining contracts from 
Choctaw claimants, for the prosecution of their right to participate 
in the funds and property of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma; 
said Mrs. Taylor stating to him that each beneficiary would be 
entitled to receive 320 acres of land or double the value of it in 
money, also anywhere from $5,000 to $10,000 in cash from the Choc- 
taw funds, but that in order to participate in this distribution, claim- 
ants must enter into contracts without delay, as the time limit would 
soon expire, therefore promptness in executing contracts for same 
was absolutely necessary. 

Mr, Boyd, who is of Choctaw blood, a lawyer by profession with 
quite a lucrative practice, and who is also a member of the State 
Assembly of Louisiana, feels chagrined in having fallen to the 
flattering presentation of the matter by Mrs. Taylor, resulting in 
his entering into a contract for himself and his sister and for which 
he paid Mrs. Taylor $7.50 for executing each of said contracts. 

Mr. Boyd stated that Mrs. Taylor procured a great many similar 
contracts at Leesville, La., and surrounding country, and that he has 
little doubt but that she thus realized in the neighborhood of $3,000 
from her charge of $7.50 to applicants for each contract obtained. 
Mr. Boyd further stated that after realizing he had been victimized 
in the sum of $15, through the enthusif>sm aroused by a plausible 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 129 

talk, he, in order to have the solicitors prosecuted, if possible, made 
diligent inquiry of persons who had entered into similar contracts to 
ascertain if anj^ of them had represented themselves as Government 
officials, and was unable to find any person to whom they represented 
themselves as being in any way connected with the Government or 
an official of the Choctaw Nation, but that the impression prevailed 
among the claimants that A. P. Powell and his assistants were fully 
empowered to procure the contracts they were engaged in soliciting 
from Choctaw claimants. 

Mr. Boyd still further stated that having talked a great deal against 
these solicitors, denouncing them as frauds and fakirs, that Powell 
never visited Leesville, La., to solicit contracts, but established him- 
self for a short time at De Kidder, 21 miles distant, and sent notices 
to Leesville applicants to proceed to De Kidder for that purpose. 

I made particular inquiry as to whether or not Powell or any of 
the other solicitors had been ever heard to represent themselves as 
Government officials or officials of the Choctaw Nation, but did not 
meet any person Avho stated that they had ever heard any of those 
solicitors make such a statement. On the contrary, many of the 
persons whom I interrogated with reference thereto stated that they 
had frequenth' heard Powell say that he was fighting the Govern- 
ment to have the rightful claims of the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Indians allowed; but notwithstanding the fact that Powell when 
questioned regarding the matter invariably denied that he had any 
connection with the Government in the work he was engaged in, the 
impression prevailed, as expressed by Attorneys Cline and Boyd and 
Mr. Luke W. Conerly, especially among the more ig-norant persons, 
that Powell represented some high authority in the premises, he 
being engaged in executing contracts wdth claimants, using printed 
blank forms therefor, and this impression prevailed as to the several 
other solicitors engaged in obtaining similar contracts. 

When assigned to this investigation, the Indian Office furnished 
nie. for my information, a voluminous file of correspondence with 
reference to this matter, which file embraced report of Special United 
States Indian Agent W. W. McConihe. dated May 2, 1911, with ac- 
companying exhibits, from Avhich record, together with what I ascer- 
tained in my investigation, the facts appear to be as follows: 

1. The citizenship rolls of the Choctaw Nation, embracing those 
Indians entitled to share in the property of the tribe, was closed 
March 4. 1907 (act of Apr. 26, 1906; 31 Stat. L., 137, sec. 2). 

2. That there were possibly some persons omitted from the citi- 
zenship rolls who, because of the limitations imposed by the law as 
to time, were unable to produce the proof of their right to participate 
in the funds of the Choctaw Nation under article 14 of the treaty of 
September 27, 1830. 

3. The possibility that there were some jSIississippi Choctaw In- 
dians whose right to enrollment had not been recognized induced a 
firm of attorneys — Messrs. Crews & Cantwell, of St. Louis, \Io. — 
to undertake the securing of legislation that would permit the re- 
opening of the rolls for the purpose of establishing the rights of those 
who had previously failed to establish their right or had failed to 
take advantage of the opportunity to do so. 

2.5134— PT 4—10 9 



130 INDIAN APPEOPKIATION BILL, 1917. 

4. Messrs. Crews & Cantwell employed Alexander P. Powell, who 
asserts that he is a Choctaw Indian, to procure the names of imen- 
rolled Mississippi Choctaw Indians and produce evidence by tracing 
the ancestry to establish their right to enrollment, and to obtain con- 
tracts from them for the prosecution of their claims. 

5. Associated with Messrs. Crews & Cantwell was one S. L. Hurl- 
but, a banker residing at El Campo, Tex., who financed the project 
in the beginning by paying Powell $150 per month salary and his 
expenses. 

6. Powell, while employed by Crews & Cantwell, procured the 
names of about 4,200 persons who claimed, or were led to believe by 
Powell, that they were entitled to participate in the funds of the 
Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, and from each of whom he obtained 
a contract authorizing Crews & Cantwell to act as their attorneys in 
all legal proceedings in presenting to the Interior Department or 
any court such evidence as he or she might be able to produce in estab- 
lishing a right to participate in the distribution of the fund and 
property of the Choctaw-Chickasaw Indians of Oklahoma, which 
contracts provided that Crews & Cantwell were to receive 30 per 
cent of all sums of money, lands, and property that might be re- 
ceived by reason of the right claimed. Powell did not make any 
charge to the claimants while operating under the above stated salary, 
until a short time previous to severing his connections with Crews & 
Cantwell, Avhen he commenced charging the claimants $1.25 for each 
contract executed, and while engaged in this work in the employ of 
Crews & Cantwell it appears from the record that Powell received 
$2,971.02 from them, $900 of Avhich was for salary and remainder 
for expenses incurred by him as shown by letter from Mr. S. L. 
Hurlbut's office, dated March 8, 1911, copy herewith. P^xhibit A. 

7. Powell's connection with Crews & Cantwell appears to have 
terminated in March, 1911, and he then commenced soliciting con- 
tracts for William B. Matthews, an attorney of Washington, D. C, 
with office in the Evans Building, and the contracts procured by 
Powell in the name of Mr. Matthews are similar in every respect to 
those he obtained for Crews & Cantwell, except as to name of the 
attorney. 

The Crews & Cantwell contracts contain the stipulation that their 
appointment as attorneys is joint, and that in the event of the death 
of either, the survivor shall succeed to all rights and benefits, and 
perform all the duties imposed by the contract upon the attorneys. 
Tliis same stipulation is contained in the printed form of contract 
taken in the name of William B. Matthews [copy herewith], and the 
fact that it does so appear would indicate that jNIr. Matthews had 
nothing to do with the drafting of the form, but that the wording 
of the Crews & Cantwell contract was ]:)robably adapted by A. P. 
Powell, simply substituting the name of AVilliam B. Matthews, as 
attorney, for that of Crews & Cantwell, and Powell thus continued 
procuring contracts from any and all persons whom he met, who 
believed, or were led to believe, that they possessed Choctaw or 
Chickasaw Indian blood, and from each of whom he collected $2.50 
for his services in executing the papers. 

8. After Powell discontinued securing contracts for Crews & Cant- 
well and started soliciting for Attorney William E. Matthews and 
charging applicants $2.50 for each set of papers executed, it is al- 



INDIAN APPKOPKIATIOX BILL^ 1917. 131 

leged he procured contracts from a number of persons residing in 
and around Kinder, Allen Parish, La., who did not claim to be of 
ChoctaAv descent, but were advised by Powell that he possessed a 
book which enabled him to trace the ancestry of eA^ery living person 
Avho possessed any ChoctaAv blood, and that he had traced those 
people entitled to enrollment as descendants of certain persons ap- 
pearing as beneficiaries under the Choctaw treaty of 1830. As to 
the book referred to as possessed by Powell, which is said to have 
been produced in evidence by him very frequently, I was informed 
by Mr. Luke W. Conerly, of Gulf port, Miss., who was for some 
months associated Avith Powell, that he carried with him for reference 
in tracing the ancestry of applicants for enrollment a copy of volume 
7, " American State Papers," which contains the names of 19,554 
Choctaw Indians who were parties to the D'ancing Rabbit Creek 
treaty of 1830, as per roll made by F. W. Armstrong, special agent, 
under date of September, 1831, which volume was published in 1860. 

10. Crews & Cantwell, as attorneys for a number of these claim- 
ants, with evidence as to some of the unenrolled Mississippi Choc- 
taws to an equitable right to share in the funds of the Choctaw 
Nation of Oklahoma, have sought legislation to reopen the rolls to 
permit them to prosecute the claims of these persons with whom 
they have contract. 

11. The financing of the project to secure reimbursements of Crews 
& Cantwell and S. L. Hurlbut for previous expenditures was 
effected by incorporating the " Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co.," 
chartered under the laws of the Territory of Arizona, November 14, 
1911. The articles of incorporation provide for a capital stock of 
$100,000, or 1,000 shares of the par value of $100 each, the directors 
of the company as incorporated being S. L. Hurlbut, of El Campo, 
Tex.; H. Masterson and W. A. Smith, of Houston, Tex.; and T. B. 
Crews and H. J. Cantwell, of St. Louis, Mo.; and the principal 
stockholders are T. B. Crews and H. J. Cantwell, of St. Louis, Mo. ; 
Clifford Greve and S. L. Hurlbut, of El Campo, Tex.; H. Masterson, 
L. Bryan & Co., J. J. Sweeney, and W. H. Gill, of Iloiiston, Tex.; 
and J. H. Kempner, of (lalveston, Tex. 

Two hundred and fift}^ shares of the 1,000 shares of the stock of 
this company were sold at par value of $100 per share, thus realiz- 
ing $25,000 in cash, with which Crews & Cantwell and S. L. Hurlbut 
were reim!)ursed for previous expenditures and a contingent fund 
created to meet futui-e expenses as incurred. 

12. Crews & Cantwell turned over to the Texas-Oklahoma Invest- 
ment Co. the contracts procured for them by Alexander P. Powell, 
numbering about 4,200, and received in cash from the fund realized 
from the 250 shares of the stock sold, reimbursement for their 
previous expenditures in connection Avith their Mississippi Choctaw 
contracts, and leaving the 750 unsold shares in the treasury as 
common propei'ty of the company. 

In promoting the organization of the Texas-Oklahoma Invest- 
ment ('o. flattering figures of prospective returns to investors therein 
appear to have been sent out to jirominent persons throughout the 
country, as evidenced by lettei- of Mr. C. B. Moling, of Houston, Tex., 
under "date of June 12,"U)11, to Hon. W. L. Dechant, of Middh>lo\vn, 
Ohio, which reads as follows: 



132 INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 

IIoiJSTON, Tkx., Jinie 12, 1911. 
Hon. W. T,. Dkciiant, 

Middletoicn. Ohio. 

\)\:.\\i Sir: In 1S20 the United States Oovennnent made a treaty with the 
('iioctaw Indians, tlien livin.^- in I\Iississii»i)i, \\lierel)y the (Government boui;;ht 
."i.OOU.UUO acres of the Indians, and in return jjave to the Indians all the lands 
lyinir in the Indian Territory n(irth of Red Kiver up to the Canadian and east 
of the ninety-eiiihth meridian, and paid for moving as many of the Indians out 
to this land as desired to jro. 

The Cliootaws still had 10,000,000 acres left hack in :\Iississippi, and in 1S30 
the Government made another ti'eaty with them wherehy the Government pur- 
(hased the remaining lands for $8,000,000. Tn tins treaty it teas agreed that 
tJie reiiiaiiiiiiff f)idia)is were to be protected in the eointnvnity property or the 
oriiiinal tandK in JiKtiaii Territory (iranted tlieiii }>y tlie treat]/ of Jf^20. 

Th.e Government still holds apprciximately 3 450.000 acres of these <iri,L:inaI 
Territory lands, as well as several millions in cash, in trust for the Choctaws 
who have not as yet been allotted their share. 

A reputable and responsible firm of attorneys, with offices in St. Louis and 
Washington, D. C, have secured contracts with 4,200 Choctaw Indians to se- 
cure them their allotment of lan<ls and money upon a percentage basis. The 
contracts provide that the attorneys are to receive 30 per cent of all lands and 
money received. These 4.200 contracts are one signed by the Indian, two wit- 
nes.ses to his signature, and acknowledged before a notary public. 

These contracts, providing for this contingent fee, have been recognized by 
Tlie Government, and Congress pas.sed a re.solution making all sucli contracts 
a first lien upon the property of the Indian. This insures direct payment to 
us of our fee. 

For financing the ])ro.iect. such as hunting up the Indians and securing the 
proof of each individual Indian to his right of participation and the attorneys 
for working the bill through Congress, one-half of the profits to go to the attor- 
neys and the other half to those who financed it. 

it is estimated that each Indian's share of the estate is worth $8,000. The 
attorneys' contract calls for 30 per cent of this, or $2,400, of which we are to 
get one-half, or $1,200. 

We are organizing a syndicate to take over 1,000 of these contracts at $25 
per contract. We will not accept subscription for less than 20 contracts, or 
$500. The estimated value of 20 contracts, if we win, will be approximately 
$24,000, or a profit of $23,500 upon each $500 investment. 

The proofs of these claims for these 4,200 Indians has all been secured and 
has been presented to the congressional Connnittee on Indian Affairs and 
reported favorably. This conmiittee consists of 10 Members of Congress. 

At this next session of Congress the bill will be introduced and voted upon, 
and as there are several precedents identical to this proposition wherein the 
other Choctaws secured their rights, we have every reason to believe that the 
bill will pass. 

Senator Owen has but 1,500 of these contracts with another batch of Choc- 
taw Indians, yet he secured a fee of $6,000,000 ; he had a contract for one-half 
of what he secured, while ours is but 30 per cent. Other similar contracts 
have been made, and all of them have been passed by Congress; and as the 
Government is holding the lands and money belonging to this tribe and have 
no interest in it either way, we see no just reason why they should not act 
upon these claims favorably at the next session. 

We are unable to go into all the details of this proposition in this letter to 
you, but I have spent several days investigating it, and conclude that the 
chances for defeat are no greater than in the ordinary course of business. I 
believe the estimated results herein will be obtained, or substantially so. 

I expect to give the matter my attention and to look after the interest of 
those who come into the deal at my request, and to take a proper assignment 
of the contracts and place them in the hands of some local trust company or 
bank with authority to make the collection and disburse the receipts to the 
subscribers in the ainoimts to which each subscriber would be entitled at same; 
it will be safer for the subscribers. 

My charge will be about 20 per cent of whatever profits you may make on 
the deal; if none are made, you owe me nothing. I would like to have you 
take a filer in this. say. for $.500 or $1,000. and to notify me of your intentions 
promptly. Should you happen to lose, I think you will agree with me that it 
was at least a good bet, as the prospective retui-ns justify taking the chance. 

Awaiting your prompt reply, either by letter or wire, I am, 
Yours, very truly, 

C. B. MOLINO. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 133 

To the foregoing comnmnication of Mr. Moling, Mr. Decliant re- 
plied as follows: 

MiDDLpnowN, Ohio. Jtthj 2'i, 1011. 
C. B. Moling, 

Ji32 Mason BuUding, Houston, Tcv. 

My Dear Mr. Moling: Your letter rf June 12 was received iu my absence, 
hence delay iu answering. 

I have gone o\er san)e carefully and note what you say, aud it would seem 
to me if Congress has taken the steps enumerated by you the proposition is a 
good one, and on further investigation I might be induced to come in, every- 
thing appearing in good shape. 

Who is the firm of attorneys representing you and located at St. Louis aud 
Washington, and what is the name of the member of the firm looking specially 
after the matter? 

Can you refer me to the reports wherein the Government has recognized the 
contracts referred to providing for a contingent fee, etc.. in these specific cases ; 
also, can you further refer me to the congressional reports, where the Congress 
recognized such contracts aud made them a valid first Hen on the Indians' 
proiierty? 

What Congress passed this resolution, legalizing these contracts as liens, and 
is it the present Committee of Congress on Indian Affairs to whom the proofs 
of the 4.200 claims you refer to, were presented and reported favorably? 

What is the name of the attorney who represented the matter to the Indian 
Affa.irs Committee of Congress, and s<v:-ured the passage of the favorable reso- 
lution? 

On receipt of a letter from you in reply to the above I will take llie matter 
up more fully and advise you at once wliat I will do. Thanking you for bring- 
ing this matter to ray attention, 
I am, as ever, yours, 

W. L. Dkchant. 

To the inquiries contained in the fo}-cgoing letter of Judge Decliant 

Mr. Moling replied as follows : 

Houston, Tex., -JhUi 2S, 1911. 
Hon. AV. L. Dechant, 

Middlctoirn, Ohio. 

My Dear .Judge: I have your letter of the 24th, in regard lo fui-tlicr informa- 
tion regarding the Choctaw Indian contracts, etc. 

I sent fo.- Mr. S. L. Hurlbut, who owns the contracts, and gav*> liim your 
letter and asked him lo give me the iiifoi-n"iatiou desired, and I hennvilli hand 
you bis dictated letter, as also the brief he refers to with the clippings attached. 

In regard to the brief and the clippings, he requests that you take care of 
them, as they are all he has here in Houston. 

It might be a good idea for you to write to Mr. Cantwell in Washinglon. as 
he is thoroughly familiar with all the details, and then the informalion would 
come to you first-handed. 

I am not per.sonally acquainted with JNIr. Cantwell or his partner, :\Ir. (Jrews, 
in St. Louis, but from what I learned they are very capable men in their line 
of business and have worked other similar contracts through Congress, but 
I know Mr. Hurlbut for several years; be is all right, and I consider him 
straight and reliable; my dealings with him has all been in the r(>al estate 
line an<l all very satisfactory ; he stands well in this community. 

It might al.so i)e a .good idea to get in touch with the chairman of (he present 
Connnittee on Indian Affairs; he ought to know all about it. 

As stated in my letter of June 12, I think it's a good bet, fi>r \\\o rea.son I 
believe the Government will carry out the terms of its treaty made wiili iliem 
in 1820 and 18.30; if they do, then these contracts will be good. 

Awaiting your further advices, I am, 
Very truly, yours, 

C. r.. Moi.iNc;. 

The presentation of the matter as abo\e set forth by ^Ir. Moling 
to Judge Dechant for financing the i)roject was so flattering as to 
justify the avei'age speculator in taking a chance, and it would 



134 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1911. 

appear, from the sale of one-fourth of the stock of the Texas-Okhi- 
lioma Investment Co. at its par value, that no great difficulty Avas 
experienced in promoting and consummating this financing of the 
project. 

About a year subsequent to the organization of the Texas-Oklahoma 
Investment Co. for financing the project of handling Mississippi- 
Choctaw Indian contracts taken in the name of Crews & Cantwell, 
Mr. Albert J. Lee, of Ardmore, Okla., a member of the law firm of 
Ballinger & Lee, claiming to represent a large number of persons 
who claim a right in the tribal property of the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Indians in Oklahoma, on a contingent fee of from 12 i to 40 
per cent, and which do not conflict with the claims handled and rep- 
resented by the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co., but are in a line 
with them, desired, as shown by certain correspondence relative 
thereto, to raise a fund of $16,000 to meet indebtedness incurred in 
the prosecution of their Indian claims and with which to continue 
the fight for their clients, and to show that persons engaged in 
handling the claims of nonenrolled Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians 
have succeeded in interesting many prominent persons in such claims, 
I submit copy of tabulated statement of said Albert J. Lee, dated 
October 17, 1912, setting forth the prospective profits that he cal- 
culates upon deriving from his handling of said claims, together 
with an indorsement of same by Mr. Harris Masterson, an attorney 
of Houston^ Tex., who is a prominent financier and promoter of 
projects of this character, which statement of Attorney Lee and 
indorsement of Mr. Masterson reads as follows : 

OCTORER 17, 1912. 

Mr. Harris Masterson, 

HotistoH, Tex. 

Dear Sir : Mr. Webster Balliiiiier and I represent some 13.000 persons who 
claim a ri^lit in tlie tribal property of the Choctaw and Chicliasaw Indians 
in Oldahoma. Of tlie above mmiber of persons represented by us, tliere are 
some 3,738 wlio are conclusively, as sliown by the Government records, en- 
titled to share in the distribution of the tribal property. An individual share 
is estimated at $3,000 cash. We represent these people under contracts pro- 
viding for a contingent fee of from 12* to 40 per cent of the value of each 
share. I am attaching a statement showing the value of our fees. The state- 
ment also shows the amount of said fees we have already contracted for. 

You will observe that my individual share of said fee will amount to $850,911, 
based upon the cases I consider certain; and that if we succeed in one-third 
of the cases that are uncertain, or rather if we succeed in enrolling 3,000 out 
of the 10,000 doubtful cases, my individual share of the fee would be $2,005,911. 

I am in urgent need of funds with which to meet indebtedness incurred in 
the ijroseeution of these claims, and with which I may be enabled to continue 
the fight for our clients, and I want to raise $16,000, which I will agree to 
return with interest, and will assign the people furnishing the money 40 per 
cent of my Individual share of the fee. Estimated upon the cases considered 
certain, tliis would return about $22 for every dollar subscribed, and upon 
the basis of one-third of the uncertain cases going through in addition to those 
that I consider certain, the estimated return would be about $120 for every 
dollar advanced. 

The following pages will give you some idea of the nature and basis of the 
claims. 

CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW LANDS, AND OTHER PROPERTY. 

In southeastern Oklahoma, in what was formerly the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Nations, are nearly 3.000,000 acres of land, which the Federal Government 
will ofTer for sale from dav to day from November 12 to December 23. this year. 
These lands are classed as follows: 900.000 acres agricultural, 445,000 acres 



IXDIAX APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 135 

agricultural surface, with deposits of coal and asphalt, 1.500.000 acres pine and 
hardwood timher. 

In addition to the above lands the coal and asphalt deposits are shortly to 
be sold. The United States mine inspector has estimated that the coal is worth 
in royalties to the Choctaw and Cliickasaw people at least $70,000,000. There 
is now on deposit to the credit of these two tribes something like $1,000,000, 
derived from the sale of town sites. 

VALUE OF PROPERTY. 

It is reasonable to assume that the Federal Government will be able to get 
for the coal deposits at least one-half of the amount that said deposits are esti- 
mated to be worth in royalties, which would be, in round numbers, $35,000,000. 

Should the 3,000,000 acres of land bring an average price of $10 per acre, 
which is a very reasonable estimate considering the fact that there is standing 
timber on 1,500,000 acres thereof, $30,000,000 will be derived from this source. 

There is no accurate estimate of the value of the asphalt deposits, but they 
are wortli several hundred thousand dollars. Eliminating the value of the 
asph.alt deposits, we have the following values : 

On deposit $10, 000, 000 

Value of the coal 35, 000. 000 

Value of the surface and timber 30. 000, 000 

Total value of the property 75, 000, 000 

OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY. 

The above property belongs to the citizens of the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations of Indians under a grant made by the Federal Government under 
the terms of the treaty of September 27, 1830. The grant conveyed to said 
Indians all the lands lying between the Canadian and Red Rivers, the Arkan- 
sas line, and the one hundredth parallel west. All of said land, however, with 
the exception of the 3,000.000 acres aboves referred to, has been parceled out to 
the individual Indians in allotments of 320 acres of average value land. 

As the property belonged to the citizens of the tribes of whom the Federal 
Government \-\'as the guardian, it became the duty of the. Federal Government, 
upon the dissolution of the tribal governments, to ascertain who were the 
citizens entitled to share in the distribution of the' property. This the Federal 
Government undertook to do. The tribal governments agreed to such action 
upon condition that each citizen be allotted 320 acres of average value land and 
slionld then share in the proceeds derived from the sale of any lands remaining 
undisposed of after all allotments had been made. It was also agreed that 
certain town sites, coal deposits, asphalt deposits, and timberlands should be 
withheld from the allotment scheme. 

Congress passed seven different acts under which the citizenship of the 
two tribes should be determined and the distribution made. The acts were : 
Act of June 10. 1896; act of June 7, 1897; act of June 28. 1898; act of May 
31, 1900; act of July 1, 1902; act of March 3, 1905; and the act of April 26, 
1900. The latter act i)rovided that the question of citizenship should be finally 
closed upon !March 4, 1907, and since that date no person has been added to the 
rolls of those Indians entitled to share in the property. Assistant Attorney 
Gener^d J. W. Howell stated to the House Conuuittee on Indian Affairs that the 
above-mentioned acts were "inherently defective," and "administered so as to 
lirevent a full realization of their purpose." (Hearing on H. R. 19279, 61st 
Cong., 2d sess., p. 265.) 

WHY THE CLAIMANTS WHOJr WE REPRESENT WERE 051ITTED FROJI THE ROLLS. 

1. Sufficient time was not given to do the work. Tlw Department of the 
Interior was forced to act pro forma upon the claims of more than 2,000 per.sons 
during the week preceding March 4, 1907. 

2. The commission created by act of Congress was incompetent and composed 
of laymen who conceived the idea that it was their duty to oppose the appli- 
cants and restrict the number of persons entitled to share to the fewest possible. 
This commi.ssion suppre.ssed records and failed to ti-aiismit the full case of 



136 INDIAN APPEOPKIATFON BILL, 1917. 

applicants to the Secretary of the Interior, who hart a supervisory authority 
and right of review. Upon charges filert against officers of tliis commission, two 
of tliom were forcert to resign. (S. Doc. No. 357, 59th Cong., 2rt sess.) 

3. The tribal officials who had control of tribal funds sought at all times to 
restrict the number of persons enrolled in order that the share of each would 
be greater. 

4. The attorneys, Mansfield, McMurray & Cornish, employed under Govern- 
ment sanction to represent the tribes, for an extra consideration of $750,000 
paid out of tribal funds, and which latter employment was unknown to the 
Government officials, succeeded in defeating the claims of nearly 4,000 persons 
who had been enrolled by judgments of the United States courts, rendered in 
cases appealed from the action of the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes 
under the provisions of the act of June 10, 1896. This action was investigated 
by the committee of Congress, and, with respect to the persons enrolled by 
judgments of the United States courts, this coumiittee said: "There was no 
way by which persons so enrolled — locally known as court citizens — could be 
eliminated lawfully from participation in the tribal estate." 

These tribal attorneys succeeded, however, in eliminating from the citizen- 
shin rolls the persons placed thereon by judgment of the United States courts 
by lobbying ihr.iugh a provision of law which became part of the agreement 
entered into by the Government and the tribes contained in the act of July 
1, 1902, with reference to Ihe distribution of the property, by having created a 
special court to review the judgments of the United States courts, and a com- 
mittee of Congress has reported upon the manner in which this court was 
created, as follows : 

" After the agreement had been duly signed by the representatives of the two 
nations and by the representatives of the Government, and after it vras trans- 
mitted to Congress for ratification and approval, sections 31. 32, and 33 were 
inserted at the request of McMurray, which sections are ]ii'edicated on the 
assvnnption that the United States courts in the Indian Territory, acting under 
the act of June 10, 1S96, had admitted persons to citizenship in the Choctav/ 
and Chickasaw Nations without notice to both of said nations. It was con- 
tended by the nations th.at in such proceedings notice to each of said nations 
was indispensable, and they claimed and insisted that the proceedings in the 
United States courts in the Indian Territory, under the act of June 10, 1S9G, 
sh(»ul(l have been conMned to a roview of the action of the Commission to the 
Five Civilized Tribes upon the record in each case and should not have ex- 
tended to a trial de novo of the question of citizenship. These sections author- 
ized the two nations jointly, or either of said nations acting separately and 
making the other a party defendant, by a bill in equity filed in the citizenship 
court, to bring a suit for the purpose of testing the validity of all such decisions 
of the I'nited States courts. It further provided that 10 persons admitted to 
citizenship or enrollmi'ut by the United States courts, with notice to but one 
of said nations, should be made defendants to a suit as representatives of the 
entire class of per.sons similarly situated. In other words, it authorized the 
bringing of a test suit, an<l provided that in the event said citizenship judg- 
ments or decisions were annulled or vacated, any party thereto, within 90 
days thereafter, by a wi-itten application, might have his case transferred to 
the citizenship court by the court where the judgment was entered, and that the 
citizenship court should have jurisdiction therein as if no judgment or decision 
had l)een rendered by the United States coiu't. It was provided that the judg- 
ment of the citizenship court should be final. 

This act pi'ovided that it should not be effective until submitted to and rati- 
fied by a vote of the two nations, but exception was made as to sections 31, 32, 
and 33, creating the citizenship court, but which became effective upon the 
passage and approval of the act. 

Immediately following the passage of the act ratifying the agreement of 
1902, the judges authori:;ed to be appointed to constitute the citizenship court 
were appointed, as follows: Spencer Adams, of North Carolina: Henry S. Foote, 
of California ; and Walter L. Weaver, of Ohio. Judge Foote appears to hnvc^ 
been appointed upon the recommendation of Senator Stewart, v.iio was then 
chairman of the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, and Judge .\danis, on the 
recommendation of Senator Pritchard, of North Carolina. Judge Foote was 
the brother-in-law of Senator Stewart, The law creating this court is without 
legislative pnral'ol : the maimer of its enactment was extraordinary, and the 
authority which it conferred upon the court it created is without precedent in 
American jurisprudence. 



INDIAN" APPROPRIATION BILL, 1017. 137 

As; soon as this court was created and organized, the firm of Mansfield, Mc- 
Murray & Cornish proceeded to bring: before it a very large number of claims 
of " court citizens," and they succeeded in eliminating from the rolls lietween 
S.noo and 4,000 persons. They then claimed a fee of 9 per cent on a basis of 
$4,800 per person, as provided in the contingent-fee contract made in 1901, before 
referred to, which had not been approved in accordance with law. (H. Rept. 
No. 2273, 61st Cong., 2d sess.) 

It was reported, and commonly accepted as a fact, that Judges Foote and 
Adams received a part of the fee paid Mansfield. McMurray & Cornish, and in 
the case of Adams i\ Butler, in whicli ease Adams sued ex-United States Sena- 
tor Butler, of Nortli Carolina, for libel, it was shown that Adams received 
$50,000 of the fee. While the committee was considering the evidence upon 
which the above report was made. Judge Adams cut his throat with a razor. 
Judge Foote died shortly after the fee was paid. Foote was a confirmed 
drunkard. 

5. There are many other reasons impossible of explanation in this short 
statement. 

C0Nfan':ss now considering cl.vijis. 

Since the closing of the rolls those whose naines appear thereon and the 
llepresontatives in Congress from Oklahoma have constantly pi-essed for legis- 
lation directing the Secretary of the Interior to finally wind up the affairs of 
tlie tribes ami to distribute the funds to those enrolled. This Congress has 
refused to do, and at each session has considered tlie enactment of legislation 
that would place upon the rolls all meritorious cases. The hearings upon such 
proposed legislation has progressed to the point \^•here it now seems certain 
tluit action will be taken at the coming session of Congress. The Secretary of 
the Interior, on February 12, 1910. recommended that Congress give him 
authority to add to the rolls two classes of persons v\-ho had been omitted. 
(App. Hearing on H. II. 19279, 61st Cong., 2d se.ss.) And during the last ses- 
sion of Congress the Secretary advised Congress tliat there were several dif- 
ferent classes of cases which should be reheard before the estates were finally 
wound up, and suggested that Congress give him authority to hear the cases 
and to add the names to the rolls of those persons found entitled to be placed 
thereon. 

It is our purpose to continue the fight for oui- clients until definite action is 
taken by Congress. We liave been strong enough at all times to prevent a final 
settlement and distribution of the property. The opposition now realizes that, 
in order to get their own shares of the property, they must consent to legisla- 
tion giving our clients theii" I'ights. I have spent a great deal of money and 
have given all of my time since March 4, 1907, in the work of securing .iustice 
for our clients, and I shall continue to do so until some final action is taken by 
Congress. 

ESTIMATED VALI'E OF EACH CLAIMANT'S SHAKE OK PKOPEKTY. 

As the lands have all either been allotted or ordered to be .sold, the persons 
added to the rolls will have to take their sliare of the estate in cash, and it 
has been tentatively agreed that each person so eni'oUed is to receive $3,000 
in casli. 

Yours, very trul.v, 

Ai.BEirr J. I.EE. 

CLAIMS IN CHOCTAW AND CHICK.VSAW ESTATE. 

Below is the list of the number of persons claiming a share of the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw tribal estates, represented by Ballinger »& Lee, attorneys, and 
the basis of their employment. 

The value of an individual share in the e.state is e.stimated at $8,000 in cash. 

Number of individual claimants: 3,738. more or less. 

Of the above number 2,051 j)ersons, more or less, are represented under 
written contracts and powers of attorney, for a contingent fee of 40 jier cent of 
claims rei-overed ; 487 are represented by agreement with other attorneys who 
liold contracts for 2.") pvr cent of recovery, the share of I'allinger & liOe being 
12^ per cent of the anidunt I'ecovei-ed. One thousand two hundred persons, more 
or less, are rej^resented by T'.allinger & I.ee under 50 per cent contract, of which 
Ballinger & Lee's shai'e will estimate $500 per person. 



138 IXDIAX APPEOPKIATION BILL, 1917. 

I>ee's proposed sale of 40 per cent of his individual shares, or foe. is fij^ured 
as follows : 

2.051 persons. 
$3,000 Value of individual share. 



$6,153,000 Total value of shares of 2.051 persons. 
40 per cent basis of fee. 



$2,461,200 Estimated fee. 
487 persons. 
$3,000 Value of share. 



$1,461,000 Total value of shares of 4S7 persons. 

12i per cent basis of fee of Balliuger & Lee. 



$183,023 Total estimated fee of Ballinger & Lee for 487 persons. 
1,200 persons. 
$500 Ballinger & Lee's fee per person. 



$600,000 Total estimated fee for 1.200 persons. 
$2,461,200 
183.023 
600.000 



$3,244,223 Total of Ballinger & Lee's fee. 
Less 150,000 Estimated expense of collection. 



$3,094,223 

45 per cent with which assistance was contracted. 



$1,392,400 Estimated cost of assistance. 
$3,094,223 Net fee. 
Less 1.392.400 Cost of assistance. 



2) $1,701,823 Net fee to Ballinger & Lee. 



850.911 Net fee to Lee. 

40 per cent proposed assignment. 



$340,364 Fee which will go to owners of the 40 per cent to be sold. 

In addition to the above cases, we represent about 10,000 people wliose recoi-ds 
do not conclusivel.v show that they are entitled to share in the distribution of 
the property, but if Congress permits proof to be made in these cases, I esti- 
mate that at least 3,000 of them will be ,<i<M>d. Our fee in these cases is 40 per 
cent, and in the event of success in the 3,000 cases indicated, my individual fee 
wouhl a]iproximate $2,065,911. My proposed assignment includes all of these 
cases. 

Albert J. Lee. 



Masterson & Masterson, Attorneys at Law, 
Houston, Tex., October 11, 1912. (Iloceived Apr. 20, 1914.) 
To ichom it may concern: 

I have carefully read the statement of Albert J. Lee, of the law firm of 
Ballinger & Lee. in his letters of the 17th instant, relating to the claims of the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians, represented by bis tirm, and from my own 
knowledge of the facts, the manner in which the estate of these Indians was 
administertMl by ofhcers of the Federal Government, and the steps that are now 
being taken to protect the interests of the claimants, I know that Mr. Lee's 
statement is substantially correct. The claims represented by Mr. Lee are 
meritorious ; however, he does not by half .set forth the merits of the claims, 
nor does his statement fully cover the injustice that has been perpetrated upon 
the class of Indians whom he represents. It would be impossible for him to 
fully deal with the merits of these claims in a brief letter. 



INDIAN APPEOPKIATION BILL, 1917. 139 

The records in these cases are so plain and so clearly disclose fraud and 
incompetent administration that I am firmly convinced that Congress will 
restore the claimants to tlieir rights. I therefore believe that money advanced 
to Mv. Lee in aid of his cases will return a big profit within the next two 
years, and that sucli profits will not be less than a return of $20 for every 
dollar advanced him. 

On the 7th day of this month I furnished $2,000 to Mr. Lee in order to 
afford liim temporary relief in connection with the Indian claims represented 
by him, and in addition thereto I am subscribing $2,000 to the fund of $16,000 
which he is now endeavoring to raise, notwithstanding the fact that I am 
largely interested in similar claims of the Choctaw Indian descendants. 

Of "my own knowledgi^ — for I have investigated many of the claims of the 
clients of IMr. Lee before deciding to invest $4,000 in the enterprise, I know 
that the claims of the Indians so investigated, whom Messrs. Ballinger & Lee 
represent, are full of merit. I therefore consider the $2,000 already invested 
and subscription of $2,000 to be in the nature of a fine speculative investment. 
It is hoped, and I think reasonably certain, that the Choctaw claimants will 
be given relief during the coming session of Congress. 

These claims dc» not conflict with the claims handled and represented by the 
Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co., but are in line with them. 
Yoiirs, very truly, 

H. Masterson. 

I visited Muskogee, Okla., where I conferred with Commissioner 
Wright and Superintendent Kelsey with reference to persons solicit- 
ing contracts from the Indians of Oklahoma, and then proceeded to 
Poteau, Okla., where I met T. V. Sprinkel, an attorney of that town, 
wdiom I learned had been obtaining contracts from certain Indians, 
and upon interrogating him relative thereto, he stated with apparent 
frankness that he has been engaged at intervals the past three years 
in procuring contracts from Choctaw Indians who are interested in 
v>hat is known as the Glenn-Tucker claim, and that he has not 
solicited contracts in any other Indian claim: that there are about 
700 Choctaw families interested in said claim; and that he has pro- 
cured contracts from 75 of the leading families interested, and only 
from those of them with whom he has been acquainted for many 
years past. 

He stated that to meet the expenses incurred by him in executing 
the contracts and preparing the case he charges each family $10 who 
employ him, this being the total charge he makes to each family 
regardless of the number in the family, and that his contracts pro- 
vide for payment to him of a 25 per cent contingent fee of what- 
ever he may reco^'er for them. He further stated that he has been 
engaged in this work since 1911, during which time he has made 
two trips to Washington, D. C, in the interests of his clients, and 
that up to the present time the total received by him from the 75 
families with whom he has contracts amounts to onlv $129. 

He also stated that Webster P>allinger, Walter S. Field, and W. W. 
Wright, attorneys of Washington. D. C, have a large number of 
similar contracts with Choctaw Indians. 

While at Poteau I learned tliat a colored man named Robert L. 
Fortune, of Wilbuiton, Okla., had been soliciting contracts for 
Crews & Cantwell from (^hoctaw freedmen residing in the vicinity 
of Poteau, and I obtained from Mr. Felix Bird, a notary public of 
Poteau, one of the contracts, which said Fortune had left with the 
notary for acknowledgment when the frcedman represented therein 
appeared to execute it, and after concluding my business at Poteau 
I proceeded to AVilburton. where I met said Kobert L. Fortune and 
interrogated him with reference to the matter. 



140 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

Said Robert L. Fortune resides in the town of Wilbnrton, Okla., 
and bears a good reputation in the community. lie stated to me 
that he is 48 years of age, and ^Yas for IG years, terminating in 190(3, 
a deputy United States marshal for the eastern district of Indian Ter- 
ritory, now a part of Oklahoma, and that about three years ago 
he was employed by a negro lawyer, named J. Milton Turner, to 
canvass certain localities in eastern Oklahoma and procure contracts 
from Choctaw f reedmen for Crews & Cantwell, of St. Louis, Mo. ; 
that said Turner employed two other colored men as subagents in 
this work, whose names were J. E. Eubanks and H. A. Guess, re- 
spectively, and that Turner, in directing the work, maintained an 
office first at McAlester, Okla., and subsequently at Fort Smith, 
Ark,; that he (Fortune) procured about 700 contracts for Crews & 
Cantwell from Choctaw freedmen, including minors, but took no 
contracts from minors except when executed b}^ legal guardians; 
that he delivered all of the contracts thus procured by him to J. 
Milton Turner, who paid him $1.25 for each duly executed contract 
delivered, and that the contract provided for a 35 per cent contingent 
fee to Crews & Cantwell. 

Said Eobert L. Fortune stated that in no instance while engaged 
in this work did he represent himself as a Government official, but 
invariably as a subagent of J. Milton Turner, in procuring contracts 
for Crews & Cantwell, of St. Louis, Mo. ; that H. A. Guess, another 
of Turner's subagents, who was a negro attorney, then residinir st 
McAlester, Okla., was given a much larger and better territory tts 
ojoorate in than that assigned to him by Turner, in consequence of 
which, as stated by Fortune, Subagent Guess procured about douhip 
the number of contracts that he (Fortune) obtained, and which, with 
the contracts procured by J. E. Eubanks. another of Turner's sub- 
agents, a colored man. and said to be a lawyer, whose field of opera- 
tion was in the southeastern part of Oklahoma and adjoining terri- 
tory in Arkansas, and Fortune stated, as an estimate, that about 2.300 
contracts Avere obtained for Crews & Cantwell from Choctaw freed- 
men by himself and the two other subagents operating under the 
direction of said J. Milton Turner. 

On the 23d ultimo I called upon Mi'. PTarris Masterson. attorney 
at law, at his office in the Chronicle Building. Houston. Tex., and 
had a very pleasant interview with him relative to his connection with 
certain attorneys engaged in prosecuting IMississippi-Choctaw Indian 
claims, and he was exceedinglv courteous throughout our conference. 

Mr. Masterson is a very affable gentleman and stated quite freely 
his interest in the claims handled by Crews & Cantwell. in which he 
said he became interested bv having the case presented and explained 
to him by Mr. S. L. Hurlbut. of El Campo, Tex., and that after 
investigating the matter he ccmcluded to go in on it as a s])ocu]ative 
investment, and that he took an active part in promoting the organ- 
ization of the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co. to finance the project. 

The organization of said company and financing of the ]:)roject is 
set forth on pages 12 and 13 of this report, based upon the statements 
of Mr. Masterson to me with reference thereto. 

Mr. ISIasterson further stated that he also promoted the raising of 
a fund for Attorney Albert J. Lee, of Ardmoi-e, Okla.. to enable him 
to continue the prosecution of certain Choctaw-Chickasaw Indian 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 141 

claims that are being handled by Ballinger & Lee, which do not con- 
flict with those handled by Crews & Cantwell. 

Luke W. Conerly, of Gulf port, Miss., being frequently referred to 
in the communications contained in the file of papers furnished me 
by the Indian Office for use in my investigation, and his name ap- 
pearing in the correspondence as an active solicitor in obtaining 
contracts from Mississippi Choctaws, therefore I proceeded to Gulf- 
port. Miss., to meet him. 

I reached Gulfport the afternoon of the 27th ultimo, and learning 
that Mr. Conerly lived out in the country about 3 miles from Gulf- 
port, I got into telephone communication with him and he imme- 
diately came in to meet me at the Great Southern Hotel, where we 
were over 3 hours in conference, and he returned about 9 o'clock the 
following morning, accompanied by Henry Wilson and Carl Wilson, 
two prominent members of the Mississippi-Choctaws, and remained 
until near noon discussing Choctaw matters generally and A. P. 
Powell particularly. 

The said Luke W. Conerly is 73 years of age and a lawyer b}^ pro- 
fession, but has not practiced in the courts for several years past. 
He is quite intelligent, bears a good name in the community, and is 
well spoken of by those Avho know him. He claims to be a lineal 
descendant of one of the leading Choctaw- families who participated 
in the Dancing Babbit Creek treaty of 1830, and stated that he is 
now regarded by all the Choctaws living outside of Oklahoma as 
their captain and recognized leader; also that it was he who first 
-interested Congressman Harrison, of Mississippi, in Choctaw matters 
and got him to introduce the bill for reopening the Choctaw rolls; 
that he had interested United States Senators Williams and Varda- 
man, of Mississippi, in the Choctaw- claim; also Congressman Mor- 
gan, of Louisiana, in whose district many ChoctaAvs reside. 

I had a very pleasant interview with Harry Wilson, president 
chief council. Society of Mississippi ChoctaAvs, together with his son, 
Pearl L. Wilson, secretary of said council, both of whom reside in 
Gulfport, Miss., and they corroborated substantially the statements 
of Luke W. Conerly regarding Mississippi Choctaw matters. 

Mr. Conerly stated that he assisted A. P. Powell in writing up 
contracts with Mississippi Choctaws in 1910, when Powell was 
working on a salary for Crews & Cantwell, and that again in March, 
1911, he commenced assisting Powell in writing up contracts for 
W. B. Matthews, an attorney of Washington, D. C, and for whom 
Powell procured 2,258 contracts and had charged the claimants 
$2.50 each for executing. He further stated that he was in Wash- 
ington, D. C, in February, 1912, and suggested to Mr. Cantwell, wdio 
was also in Washington, the advisability of Crews & Cantwell 
purchasing the INIatthews contracts, as Mr. Matthews had never 
done anything toward furthering the ChoctaAv case before the com- 
mittees of Congress or elsewhere, and that Mr. Cantwell was so 
favoi'ably impressed with the ])i'oposition that he authorized him 
(Conerly) to call upon Attorney iNIatthews and endeax'or to bring 
about a transfer of his conti'acts to Ci-ews it Cantwell, which he 
(Conerly) proceeded to carry out, resulting in ISIr. jNIatthews trans- 
ferring the 2.258 contracts that were procured in liis name to Crews 
& Cantwell for a cash consideration of $1,300, together with Mr. 
Matthews retaining a certain per cent interest in the contingent fee 



142 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

]jrovided in the contracts, and that he (Conerly) supervised the legal 
transfer of said contracts froln Matthews to Crews & Cantwell and 
carried them from INIr. Matthews's office in the Bond Building to 
Crews & CantwelFs office, then in the Munsey Building. 

Mr. Conerly further stated that A. P. Powell in his deal with 
W. B. Matthews was to receive a certain per cent of the contingent 
fee provided in the contracts, and in order to eliminate Powell, and 
that he would have no further interest in these 2,258 contracts, Mr. 
Cantwell paid Powell $300 in cash ; this payment to Powell, as stated 
Ijy Mv. Conerly, was that he might thus be gotten rid of in a friendly 
Avay and Avith the understanding that he (Powell) was not to return 
to Mississippi to engage in soliciting contracts with Choctaw or 
Chickasaw claimants. 

Mr. Conerly stated that he was then engaged by Crews & Cant- 
well to procure contracts for them, and that arrangements were sub- 
sequently made by which PowtII assisted him for a time, and that 
during 1912 and early part of 1913 he (assisted by Powell) procured 
about 1,300 contracts for Crews & Cantwell and turned the same in 
to them; that Powell then commenced taking contracts in his own 
name, and his present whereabouts are unknown to Conerly. 

Mr. Conerly still further stated that since March, 1913, he has been 
in the employ of Mr. T. B. Crews, of the firm of Crews & Cantwell, 
in ]Drocuring Choctaw contracts, and had on the 28th ultimo about 
1,800 executed contracts all indexed and ready to turn in, thus ap- 
proximating about 9,558 of this class of contracts controlled by Crews 
& Cantwell, apart from any they may have obtained through parties 
whom he (Conerly) has no knowledge. To the above-stated total 
may be added the 2,300 freedmen contracts as estimated by Robert 
L. Fortune, of Wilburton, Okla., who was one of the solicitors ob- 
taining contracts from Freedmen for Crews & Cantwell. 

Mr. Conerly stated to me that he had obtained contracts from 
Mississippi Choctaws residing in 15 different States, and that there 
are now so many influential persons interested in this claim that he 
has great hope of the early enactment of legislation directing the 
reopening of the Choctaw and Chickasaw rolls. 

With reference to the representations made and methods adopted 
by A. P. Powell in obtaining contracts from Mississippi Choctaw 
p.l^plicants Mr. Conerly stated that he had been associated with 
Powell at intervals, from 1910 to the early part of 1913, in writing up 
contracts for Choctaw claimants, and that during all that period he 
bad never heard Powell represent himself as a Government official; 
on the contrary, had often heard him tell applicants that he was in 
no way connected with the Government, but that the impression pre- 
A ailed among the people in general that Powell represented some 
liigh authority in canvassing for and executing the contracts he was 
obtaining; that he never heard Powell state that he Avas a lawyer, 
but knows that the impression i^revailed in general that he was an 
attorney. 

Mr. Conerly stated that he has not met Powell during the past 
year and did not know where he is at the present time, but had 
heard that he is still engaged in soliciting contracts from ChoctaAv 
claimants, taking the contracts in his ow'n name on a 20 per cent 
contingent fee and charging each applicant $2.50 for executing their 
])apers, and he (Conerly) expressed the belief that Powell has 



INDIAN APPKOPKIATIOX BILL, 1917. 143 

realized several thousand dollars through the $2.50 fee invariably re- 
ceived by him from each of the many claimants from Avhom he 
obtained contracts since severing his connection with Crews & Cant- 
well in 1911. 

Mr. Conerly remarked with reference to A. P. Powell that he re- 
garded him as a shrewd individual who made a good impression upon 
persons meeting him casually, but that from having acquired a very 
thorough knowledge of Powell's characteristics, he (Conerly) would 
not wish to be associated with him in any business transaction. 

As pertinent in the premises. I transmit herewith as " Exhibit 
B " copy of statement of said Luke W. Conerl3\ made under oath to 
Special Indian Agent W. W. McConihe at Jackson, Miss., on April 
26, 1911; the original of Avhich I submitted to Mr. Conerly at Gulf- 
port, Miss., on the 28th ultimo and which he verified as true antt a 
correct statement of matters herein referred to up to the time the 
said statement was made and sworn to by him. 

There is also transmitted herewith as '' Exhibit C " letter of Luke 
W. Conerly, of Gulf port, Miss., addressed to me under date of iTtli 
instant, to which is attached a printed circular of Crews & Cantwell, 
dated February 16, 1912, accompanied by printed copy of an affidavit 
of A. P. Powell, dated November 6, 1911, which has reference to 
the discontinuance of A. P. Powell by Crews & Cantwell and the 
emploj^ment by them of said Mr. Conerly to continue the work of 
procuring contracts from Choctaw claimants who desired to be rep- 
resented by Crews & Cantwell. 

I also transmit, as " Exhibit D," copy of affidavit of said A. P. 
Powell, acknowledged at Jackson, Miss., by W. W. McConihe, special 
United States Indian agent, on April 27, 1911, wherein Powell states 
that he took about 4,000 applications and made no charge for them, 
after which he charged applicants $1.25 each : that he made this 
charge because the money that had been advanced by Crews, Cantwell 
& Hurlbut was exhausted ; that he sent all these claims he was making 
a charge for to Crews & Cantwell ; that he took about 100 applications 
at Monticello, Miss., for Crews & Cantwell and charged $2.50 each 
there; that he took a few names at Biloxi, Miss., and charged $1.25 
for each applicant there, and that these claims were for Crews & 
Cantwell; that he also visited Meridian, Miss., and took about 88 
applications there for Crews & Cantwell, but for which no charge 
was made ; and that he had taken no applications for Crews & Cant- 
well after his association with Matthews (meaning Attorney W. B. 
Matthews, of Washington, D. C). 

From the foregoing statements of Powell in his said affidavit he 
doubtless took contracts for Crews & CantAvell from approximately 
4,200 claimants, as stated on page 13 of this report, and also as shown 
on page 14 hereof, by copy of Mr, C. B. Moling's letter of June 12, 
1911, to Hon. W. L. Dechant, of Middletown, Ohio, which, with 
the 2,258 contracts taken by Powell for W. B. INIatthews and sub- 
sequently transferred to Crews & Cantwell, and as stated by Luke W. 
Conerly (assisted by Powell), 1,300 turned into Crews & Cantwell 
during 1912 and early part of 1913 (see p. 37 of this report), together 
with about 1,800 additional contracts which Mr. Conerly has re- 
cently procured and ready to turn in to Mr. Crews (see also p. 37 
of this report), approximates 9,558 of this class of contracts on a 
30 per cent contingent fee, controlled by Crews & Cantwell and their 



144 INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL, 1917. 

associates of the Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co., and which, with 
about 2,300 contracts obtained for Crews & Cantwell from f reedmen 
on a 35 per cent contingent fee, as stated by Robert L. Fortune (see 
pp. 30-32 of this report), brings the number of claimants repre- 
sented by them up to 11,858, approximately. 

I transmit herewith five forms of blanks used in executing these 
contracts, " Exhibit E " being the form used by A. P. Powell in pro- 
curing contracts for Crews & Cantwell while working on a salary 
for them. " Exhibit F " was the form used by said Powell while 
procuring contracts for W. B. Matthews. " Exhibit G " is the form 
now being used by A. P. Powell in taking contracts in his own name. 
" Exhibit H " is the form used by Luke W. Conerly in writing up 
contracts for T. B. Crews. " Exhibit I " was the form used by the 
three subagents of J. Milton Turner in procuring contracts from 
Choctaw and Chickasaw- freedmen for Crews & Cantwell, and " Ex- 
hibit J " contains copies of five notices circulated by A. P. Powell in 
soliciting contracts; also specially prepared press dispatches for dis- 
tribution, with the evident object of thus arousing enthusiasm in the 
Mississippi Choctaw matter. 

In conclusion, I desire to state that from a careful perusal of 
the numerous letters of claimants, from whom A. P. Powell had 
obtained contracts, seeking information wdth reference thereto, as 
contained in the file of papers furnished me by the Indian Office for 
reference in this investigation, together with my having interrogated 
numerous persons as to the representations made to claimants by 
Powell and other solicitors, it appears that Powell did not represent 
himself as an official of the Government nor of the Choctaw Nation, 
and thus therefore avoided violating the statutes in that respect, not- 
Avithstanding which, as stated by many persons, the impression un- 
doubtedly prevailed, especially among the more ignorant, that he 
was a lawyer and represented the Government in some manner in 
soliciting contracts from Choctaw- claimants. 

Many persons whom I interrogated regarding the matter asserted 
that Powell had invariably denied being in any w^y connected with 
the Government, and was only endeavoring to get the rolls reopened 
that the unenrolled Choctaws might receive their rightful shares, 
which, as stated by him. would he 320 acres of land and about 
$2,500 in cash to each claimant, less 30 per cent contingent fee to the 
attorneys. 

I return herewith the file papers furnished me by the Indian 
Office for reference in this investigation. 

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, 

James McLaughlin, 

Inspector. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 145 

Exhibit A. 

I S. L. Iliirlbut, president; L. II. Beal, secretary. Alfalfa, corn, oats, cotton, rice, cane, 

and truck lands.] 

Gulf Coast Land & Investment Co., 

State Bank Building, 
EI Campo, Tex., March 8, 1911. 
A. P. Powell, 

Bay St. Louis, Miss. 
Deah SiK : Your letter addres-sed to Mr. Hurlbut, under date of March 6, 
has just reached us, and as INIr. Hurlbut is away from the oflice at this time 
and as you seem to have a wrong idea of the amount that has been spent for 
contracts, or rather for the actual (>xpense of takinc; contracts up to the pres- 
ent time, we think it advisable to supply you with the figures, as shown on our 
books, for the money already paid out for field work, for the actual expense 
of taking the contracts, not to say anything of that used by Crews »;'c G;'.ntv\-ell, 
in getting ready for proving up. 

Powell has received, to cover expenses, to date $2, OOG. 02 

Powell has received salary for taking contracts 900. 00 

Nickols has received for helping in taking Oklahoma contracts 12.5. 00 

Turner has received for helping in taking Oklahoma contracts 165. 00 

Hurlbut has been to an expense in going to Oklahoma and taking 
contracts there 327. 00 

Or there has been a total spent on taking contracts of 3, 523. 02 

So you will see that, instead of as you say, when you make the statement 
that you have used only $1,800 yourself you have really used .$2,906.02, and 
this does not include the $65 given you by Cantwell while you were in Wash- 
ington the last time. And you will see by this that Mr. Hurlbut was exactly 
right when he stated that about $7,000 has already been spent. 

Mr. Hurlbut will no doubt answer the part of your letter wdiere you refer 
to his paying you $122 when he returns to the office, and I think this matter 
will ])e fixed up between you and him in a satisfactory manner, as he wishes 
to do exactly what is i-iglit by you. 
Yours, very tndy, 

L. S. Hurlbut. 
PerL. H. Beal. 



statement of MTt. ),UKE WAKI) CONEKLY. 

Mr. Luke Ward Conerly, of Gulfport, Miss., Station A, made the following 
statement to Speeial Agent McConihe at Jackson, Miss., April 26, 1911, under 
oath : 

" I know A. P. Powell. He is engaged in vrrlting up Choctaw claims in Mis- 
sissippi. I am working wMth Mr. Powell now. Have been with him at Tyler- 
towTi, Pike Coimty, Bay St. Louis, and I am now engaged at McConib City, 
Pike County. I was not with him all the time at Bay St. Louis. I have been 
present when large numbers of persons appeared before Mr. Powell, and I 
never heard him say he wns a Government official or agent, or make any state- 
ment that could lead others to think so. 

I met Powell about July and ;isked him whnt he was doing, and he said he 
was getting up claims for Mississijipi Choctaws under the treaty of 1S.30. I 
understood Ihiit he had been before Congress with the claims. Ua said that 
Crews & Cantwell were getting up the claims to present to Congress, the courts, 
or the department. Powell said he was getting the claims for that firuL I 
do not know what he gets out of it. I have never heard Powell say that he 
was representing the Government, nctr have I ever henrd anyone say that they 
heard or w.-is told by Powell tliiit he was a United States official, or w^is repre- 
senting the (Jovornnient. At Bay St. Louis he was making no charges nt first 
for his work. Powell required every applicant to show up his ancestry. 

At Bay St. Louis he ran out of blaTdvs jind li.-id some more printed, and after- 
wards charged tliem $1.2.5, incbuling notary foe. Powell sent me to Tylertown 
to work there getting up claims, and I mside a chargo of $2.50 for each appli- 
251 .34— pt 4—1 10 



146 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

cation written up aud paid him .$1 for blanks. I wrote up about 150 applica- 
tions. Tlie charge was to cover expenses. I represented to the people that 
they were entitled to put in claims against tlie (Government under the provi- 
sions of the treaty of 1S30, subject to such legislation by Congress as might 
be determined, and that they would have to enter into a contract if they wanted 
to put in a claim on a 30 per cent contingent fee, as sliown by the contract 
with Crews <& Cantwell, who were the lawyers having charge of the matter, 
who would present the claims to Congress. I have been at McComb City woi"k- 
ing up claims since March 21, and malving a charge of $2.50 for each applica- 
tion. I pay Powell $1 for a set of blanks of two, and keep $1.25 and pay the 
notary 25 cents. I am taking all these applications in the name of William B. 
Mathews, of Washington. D. C. Last December 19 I closed at Tylertown and 
went to Bay St. Louis and brought him all the applications I had left. These 
were the last I wrote up for Crews & Cantwell. I wrote no more after that 
until about Mai'ch 13, when I met him at Columbia, where he was writing up 
claims for W. B. Mathews. He gave me to understand that he no longer repre- 
sented Crews & Cantwell. but gave me no reason for the change. He gave me 
100 sets of blanks to take to McComb and open an office there. Our agi'eement 
was that I should write 25 claims and send them to him with the $25. I have 
sent him 50 contracts and $50. I was not at Jackson with Mr. Powell. I made 
$1.25 on each application at McComb. I tell the people this is for my expenses." 
I certify that the above statement was made to me under oath. 

W. W. McCONIHE, 

Spccnal Indian Agent. 



Exhibit C. 

GuLFPORT, Miss., June 17, Wl). 
Maj. James McLaughlin, 

Inspector, Indian Office, Washington, 7). C. 

Dear Sir: While you were in Gulf port I promised you I would send you a 
circular sent out by Crews & Cantwell from Washington in reference to A. P. 
Powell and also my employment by them in February, 1912. You will note that 
during the engagement of myself by Crews & Cantwell in which ]Mr. Masterson 
was concerned I was forbldtlen to charge even a notary fee against those 
who appeared before me. 

Mr. Masterson refusing, after the 1st of February, 1913, to furnish any more 
money to cover my expenses, T took contracts during that month for that firm 
at my own expen.se. After February, 1913, say 1st of March, 1913, I entered 
into an agreement with Thomas B. Crews to take contracts in his name, he 
to cover my expenses, except I reserved the right under the IMississippi laws to 
charge my notary fee of 50 cents each against those able to pay, and I have 
made it a rule not to charge a widow or a woman dependent on her own re- 
sources for a support, nor a cripple, nor any one else not able to pay the 50 
cents notary fee. 

Not being allowed any traveling money in 1912 by Crews & Cantwell and 
Mr. Masterson, in some instances, in order to save the expense of coming to 
Gulfport, wliere there were groups of claimants, they volunteered to cover my 
expenses to their neighborhoods and return. In no instance whatever have I 
made a charge against persons putting in claims through me; neither have I 
appointed any subagent, nor allowed anyone, if I could help it, to charge for 
making out proof and contracts for others where I furnished the blanks, but 
I can not say this was not done in some instances without my knowledge. 

I have always been careful to explain the situation of our case before the 
Connnitteo on Indian Affairs, as I was present at the opening of the case before 
the subcommittee. February, 1912. and understood the situation, and have tried 
to impress upon the minds of all that the rolls could not be opened ; nor could 
the Secretary of Interior do anything without the enactment of a law to author- 
ize it; and espeiially have I urged people not to annoy the Interior Department, 
nor our lawyers and Congressmen, with letter.s — to be patient and wait. 

So anxious have our people been to get their claims in and to secure their 
rights that they would willingly have paid me a cash fee for the work of getting 
up their ancestral records and proof and preparing their papers for their 
attorneys and I could have reaped thcmsands of dollars in the last two years; 
but, instead, I have expended a thousand dollars of my own earnings going to 
them to do the work fur them free of charge, besides money furnished me by niy 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, lOlT. 147 

associates and employers, Crews & Cantwell. Knowing the Iiard contest before 
us in Congress on account of powerful opposition, I was opposed to the charge 
of a petty fee against the claimants when their attorneys were doing their 
work for a contingent fee subject to modification and approval of the Secretary. 
By a special arrangement with Mr. Cantwell and also with Thomas B. Crews, 
T own a number of contracts in my own right, taken in the name of Crews & 
Cantwell, and I am trying, and have been all the time, to conform to my instruc- 
tions from them as outlined in the circular inclosed sent out by them in 
February, 1912. 

Yours, sincerely and truly, 

Luke W. Conerly. 



Office of Crews & Cantwell, 420 Munsey Building, 

Washhigton, D. C, Fehrunry 16, 1912. 
To the Mississippi Choctaws: 

We inclose herewith a copy of an affidavit made by A. P. Powell which 
explains itself. The occasion for sending this affidavit to you and for the 
statement which follows arises by reason of the fact that all relations between 
A. P. Powell and the firm of Crews & Cantwell are now severed. 

A short history of our relations with him may not be improper. In the 
month of May, 1910, Mr. Cantwell had some business before the Committee on 
Indian Affairs with relation to citizenship claims in the Choctaw-Chickasaw 
Tribe, and made an argument before the committee on that day. At the con- 
clusion of his argument Powell made to the committee a statement of his 
claim as a Mississippi Choctaw. (A copy of the statement of Mr. Powell made 
at that time is herewith inclosed for your information.) Mr. Cantwell had 
had no occasion to investigate the claims of the Mississippi Clioctaws prior to 
that time, but upon a casual examination of the matter he became impressed 
with tlie idea that thei'e was much more fouu'lation for the claim of rights of 
the Mississippi Choctaws than had been stated by Mr. Powell before the com- 
mittee, and upon a full investigation he became convinced that the claim of 
riglits of the Mississi])pi Choctaws was well founded, and thereupon our firm 
employed Powell upon a salary to go to Mississippi and secure contracts for 
us and in our name as attorneys to represent the claimants. Powell gave us 
to understand at that time that the number of claimants would be about 
2,000, and the money was pi'ovided for all the expense of taking that number 
of contracts. There were many more clainumts than we were led to believe 
existed, and after nearly 3,000 contracts had' been taken, the money provided 
for that purpose became exhausted. Mr. Cantwell requested Powell, who was 
then in Washington, to return to Mississippi, and stop the work of taking 
contracts until arrangements could be provided for funds to pay the expenses 
of taking more contracts, and Powell was paid his expenses to return to Missis- 
sippi. Powell at that time suggested to Mr. (Jantwell that the claimants would 
pay the expenses themselves, but as no bill had been introduced for the relief 
of the Mississippi Choctaws and as it was micertain at that time whether any 
legislation would be enacted, Mr. Cantwell felt that to charge claimants for 
making out tlie papers, or to permit tlieni to pay the cost of doing so, might 
cause th(^ enemies of the Mississippi Clioctaws to designate tlie elforts to get 
them together as a scheme of graft for these fees, and our firm was not willing 
to have the cause injured by permitting any occasion for such charges. 
Powell then went to l\Ir. W. B. Matthews, a lawyer of Washington. D. C, 
and represented to Mr. Matthews that there were a large inunber of claimants 
in Mississippi who were willing to pay for writing up tluMr contracts, provided 
Ihey could get a lawyer to rei)resont fliem. Mr. Matthews conscntivl to repi-e- 
sent them in the event that l'ow(^ll could secure the contracts, ;ind (piite a num- 
ber of contracts were taken by Powell in the name of W. B. Matthews under 
this arrangement, the claimants paying a fee for writing the contracts. The 
firm of Crews & Cantwell had absolutely no connection with this whatever, 
iind during all this period Powell was not in our cniplfty and not in auyv»i.se 
connected with us. During all this time, however — tliat is. while Powell was 
taking contracts for Mr. Matthews— no contracts were taken for us or in our 
name, id(liou;;Ii we wen- doinu' mH th(> woi-k ol" pr<'p;iriim- the law govi'mini: the 
case of the Mississippi Choctaws. Powell had up to this time still retained a 
contingent interest in the fee which might be eventually recovered by us, and 
<lesiring to eliminate him from all connection with our contracts, lie was paid 



148 IXDIAX APPROPKIATIOX BILL, 1917. 

the sum of $2,400 in cash, and he then relinquished all interest, contingent or 
otherwise, in tJie contracts which he had secured for us. This payment was 
in addition to tlie sum of $150 per month and his expenses, which had been 
fully ])aid him during the time he was taking contracts for us. Later, that is, 
within the last two months, Mr. Matthews, having then investigated the mat- 
ter, because convinced that we were in a better position to present the case of 
the Mississippi Choctaws and to handle their interests than anyone else, trans- 
ferred all the contracts which had been secured in his name to us and sub- 
stituted our names as attorneys in accordance with the power given him by 
each individual contract. 

From the beginning of this work we have been entirely willing to give 
I'owoii all the credit to which he may be (Mititled by reason of the fact that, 
without knowing upon what legal ground the rights of the Mississippi Choctaws 
depended, he remained in Washington, almost friendless and alone (up to the 
time tliat he met Mr. Cantwell), insisting that he, as a INIississippi Choctaw, 
had some rights which had been disregarded. We have always regarded Powell 
as the instrument of Providence in keeping alive the claim of at least one 
Mississippi Choctaw after the closing of the roljs in 1907 up to the time when 
the work was commenced at our expense in Mississippi. For his energy after 
his return to Mississippi in keeping up the interest of the people there in their 
i-ights (although he was paid thei'efor a much higher saVnry than he had ever 
earned before in his life), we have always been willing to concede him full 
credit and honor. Unfortunately, however, Powell now seems to have the 
impression that he is a lawyer, that he should direct this campaign, and he 
has been particularly restless and sensitive about the few mild criticisms v.'hich 
we have indulged in regarding certain misrepresentations which he had igno- 
rantly made to the people in Mississippi. 

Some two weeks ago we engaged Powell upon a salary to go back to Missis- 
sippi to assist Mr. Luke W. Conerly, of Gulfport, Miss., in taking such con- 
tracts as might still be obtainable from claimants, with the express ■{)rovision 
that I'owell and Conerly should be paid a salary and that no charge should 
be made the claimants. While we do not regard it as anything improper for 
the claimants to pay the expenses necessarily incident to making contracts for 
the protection of their rights, yet, having defrayed all the expenses of taking 
contracts for us before and desiring to prevent any reflection upon the agita- 
tion for those rights as being a means by which a petty profit might be made, 
we have steadily opposed the idea of taking any contracts except at our own 
expense. 

A telegram has just been received from Powell in Mississippi saying that "Our 
deal is off." Owing to his peculiar impulsive disposition, we are led to fear that 
he may be indvdging in some misrepresentation as to what is now being done 
in Washington and that he contemplates some arrangement by which he may 
continue to charge claimants for taking their contracts as he had heretofore 
done with the Matthews contracts. 

AVe desire to say to the claimants that a bill for their full and adequate 
relief has been introduced in the lower House by Mr. Harrison, of Mississippi ; 
that all the members of tlie Mississippi delegation and INIr. Wickliffe, of Louisi- 
ana, are enthusiastically supporting the bill ; and that Congressman Harrison 
and Mr. Cantwell are now engaged in making arguments before the Subcom- 
mittee on Indian Affairs in Congress, making a full presentation of the case, 
and that everything is being done that can be done for the relief of these 
< laimants. 

^Ir. Luke W. Conerly, of Gulfi^ort, INIiss., who is himself a Mississippi Choc- 
taw claimant, will return to Mississippi from Washington in a few days, and 
any of your friends or relatives who are not now represented by us who 
desire attorneys to represent them may procure blank contracts and blank 
memoranda of evidence from Mr. Conerly. All those who apply to lum at Gulf- 
port, Miss., will have the memorandum of their evidence filed and the con- 
tracts prepared and acknowledged without charge, and upon giving him the 
preliminary information by mail, the papers will be prepared by liim and re- 
turned to you at your home in the event that you can not get to Gulfport. In 
case the papers are acknowledged at your own home, however, the claimant 
would be expected to pay the notary fee, which in any event would not be 
more than 50 cents. 

We repeat we have never had any desire to take away from Powell the 
credit for whatever work he has done. He is in the habit of looking upon him- 
self as the " father " of the Mississippi Choctaws. We have been reliably in- 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 191*7. 149 

formefl that Powell has heretofore represented thi'oughout ^lississipi)! that he 
was the attorney who presented this matter hefore Consj;ress. In order to 
gratify his vanity we had inserted in the tirst contracts a recognition of 
Powell's services, hut the copy of the statement and the only statement which 
Powell has ever made hefore any comnilttee of Congress, is herewith inclosed, 
from whicli each claimant can easily determine for himself that if the rights of 
the Mississippi Choctaws had depended upon Powell's efforts alone, they would 
not have gotten very far toward being recognized. The statement itself shows 
that Powell did nothing except call attention to his own claim, and a compari- 
son of his statement with the voluminous brief of Mr. Oantwell shows how 
imperfectly even his own rights were stated. Whatever Mr. Powell may do 
<an not affect the rights of the claimants. Their rights will be fully protected 
in any event, and this letter is sent t(.) you only for the purpose of thoroughly 
acquainting you with the situation in order to prevent the possibility of any 
M'rong impression being created in regard to your claim. 

Crews & Cantwell. 



State of Missouki, City of St. Louis, ss. 

A. P. Powell, upon his oath, deposes and says : 

That in the month of May, 1910, at the city of Washington, D. C, he was 
employed by the firm of Crews & Cantwell to secure contracts for them for 
their employment as attorneys by persons claiming rights as Mississippi Choc- 
taws under the treaty of 1830 ; that his instructions from Mr. Cantwell were to 
write the contract of no person who was not a bona fide claimant imder said 
treaty, and to write contracts with no person except those who had record or 
evidence by tradition of tlieir pedigree as a descendant of a person entitled 
to lands under the treaty of 1830 ; that he was paid a salary of $150 per month, 
and all of his expenses, and had a contract for a contingent interest in the 
fees that might be recovered by Crews & Cantwell ; that all of the expenses of 
securing about 3,800 contracts, including the acknowledgments, were paid by 
the firm of Crews & Cantwell, and that no charges were made by him against 
any of the claimants for any of his services in writing contracts for Crews & 
Cantwell ; that after Crews & Cantwell stopped taking contracts, the afiiant 
was besieged by other persons who had had no opportunity, up to that time, to 
have their contracts written, and that affiant, upon his own responsibility, took 
contracts with about 300 persons, in the name of Crews & Cantwell, charging 
the applicants a fee of $1..50 for each contract; that after communicating to 
the firm of Crews & Cantwell the fact that these last 300 had been taken for 
which this charge had been made, Mr. Cantwell first declared that as they 
liad made no charges for the other contracts, they did not want these contracts 
at all, but realizing that this would put the claimants in a bad position and that 
their rights might be neglected, the contracts were finally accepted by Crews 
& Cantwell ; that ]\Ir. Cantwell instructed this affiant to return the $1.50 charge 
made by this affiant, and that Crews & Cantwell then paid this affiant his ex- 
penses, while taking these last-mentioned contracts. 

That over 3,800 contracts had been taken prior to that time, for which no 
charges had been made; that under no circumstances and !\t no time did Crews 
& Cantwell, or any one of them, authorize or request that any contracts be 
taken for which a charge should be made, and that the only contracts taken in 
their name for which charges were made, were as above detaihMl and under the 
above circumstances, which was after Crews & Cantwell had notified this affiant 
that they did not wish to go further on taking contracts. 

That at no time and under no circumstances did Crews & Cantwell. or any- 
one of them, ever instruct this affiant to take the contract of any person who 
did not claim to be a lineal descendant of an Indian entitled to lands under 
the treaty of 1830. 

Affiant further states that he has taken no contracts with full-blood negroes; 
that until wifhin the last six weeks neither Crews nor Cantwell had any 
knowledge of the large number of i)ersons with negro blood in Mississippi 
claiming such rights, although Mr. Cantwell had stated to this affiant that 
he did not regard the presence of negro blood as a sufficient bar to destroy the 
legal right of one who hsid undoubted Indian blood and is an undoubted de- 
scendant of an Indian claiming rights under the treaty of 1830, although Mr. 
Cantwell had stated to this affiant on several occasions that the fact that one 
had negro blood would make it very difficult to establish the heirship. This 



150 INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 

affiant states that out of over 4,000 contracts taken, there are not more than 
20 per cent who have any negro blood whatever. 

Affiant further states that in consideration of the sum of $2,400 paid him in 
cash, he has relinquished and conveyed to Crews & Cautwell all his contingent 
right in the fees in the contracts above referred to, and hereby cancels said con- 
tract; and (hat this affiant h;is no further tiuancial interest in the fees or the 
contracts made in the name of Crews & Cantwell. 

Ailiant further states that he has not heretofore assigned his right to a 
contingent interest in the fees aforesaid to anyone. 

A. P. Powell. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 6th day of November, 1911. 

(My term expires June 3, 1913.) 

[seal.] Sarah M. Hawley, Notary Public. 



Exhibit D. 

Jackson, Miss., April 27, 1911. 

Alex. P. Powell, being first duly sworn by Special United States Indian 
Agent W. W. McConihe, deposes and says as follows: 

I reside at Homer, Okla. My lu'esent occupation is getting up claims among 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw Ifidiaiis and their descendants who remained in 
Jllssissippi after the Dancing Rabbitt Creek treaty of 1830. I was first em- 
ployed by Crews & Cantwell, of St. Louis, Mo. I went before the Committee of 
Indian Affairs in Congress at Washington, April 2, 1910, and they gave me a 
hearing on the claims of these Indians. Mr. Henry J. Cantwell was present at 
the hearing, and after I got tliVDUgli my talk with the committee Cantwell came 
to me and asked me how much money I wanted to take the claims in ]Missis- 
sippi. I said it would take at least .$5,000. Cantwell wired S. L. Hulbert, of 
El Campo, Tex. to come to Washington at once. Hulbert came to Washington 
and arranged with Cantwell, and Plulbert guaranteed to put up $5,000 for get- 
ting tlie work of the applications. 

I first opened an ofHce at 315 Parish Street, Jackson, Miss., and began to take 
apiilications. I put an advertisement in the paper at Jackson inviting all per- 
sons who were descendants of the Choctaw-Chickasaws under the treaty of 
1830 to appear before me and make proof of their rights and descent. I took 
altout TOO applications at Jackson and made no charges to the applicants there- 
for. I next went to Bay St. Louis and opened an office there near the railroad 
depot and put an advertisement in the Sea Coast Echo of that city, being the 
same as I put in the papers at other places. I took about 4,000 applications 
and made no charge for them. After the 4,000 were registered more applications 
came in and I charged them $1.25 each. I made this charge because the money 
that had been advanced by Crews, Cantwell, and Hulbert was exhausted, 
and they refused to put up any more money for talcing applications. This 
charge by me was to cover expenses of conthniing the work of getting applica- 
tions. I sent all these claims that I was making a charge for to Crews & 
Cantwell. I went from Bay St. Isolds to Wasliington to see Mr. Cantwell and 
tried to get Hulbert 'to put up more money and Hulbert notified me at .Tackson, 
IMiss.. that he had put up $7,000. and that we had to take proof of the same, 
and he was willing to i)ut \\\) the $7,000, for that purpose. He has not put 
it up yet. 

We wont to Columbia, ^li.ss., and took alH)Ut 100 applications there. The 
contracts that we wrote there were made in the name of William D. Matthews, 
of Washington. D. C. I have associated myself with Matthews for the reason 
that Crews & Cantwell said that they had enough claims, and that Hulbert 
would not put up any more money for claims. My agreement was made with 
Matthews that he was to appear before the committee of Congress with me, 
and our contract with the applicants was for 20 per cent of all amounts 
recovered and not for 30 per cent as was printed in the contract, which is an 
error and which has been corrected in the written applications. I went to 
Monticello and took applications for Crews & (Cantwell and charged $2.50 
each there. I took about 100 names there. I took a few names at Biloxi and 
charged $1.25 for each applicant there. These claims were for Crews & Cant- 
well. I also visited Meridian and took about 88 applications there for Crews 
& Cantwell. but for which no charge was made. I have taken no applications 
for Crews & Cantwell since my association with Matthews. 



INDIAN APPROPmATJON BILL, imT. 151 

I am working at Philadelphia, INIiss., now and have taken about 100 appli- 
cations for INIatthews and am charging $2.50, and the applicants are very will- 
ing to pay the amount. I am making this charge because Matthews has put 
up no money for nie and my expenses, and I have to use the money to pay for 
my clerk hire, office rent, and other expenses in connection with the work of 
taking applications. 

]\Ir. Luke Conerly is employed by me at McComb City, Miss., to get appli- 
cations. He charges each applicant $2.50. I get a dollar out of this $2.50 for 
my expenses and the printing of blanks which I furnish him. I have paid 
expenses of Conerly out of this money when he was traveling, board bill, 
telegraphing, and other incidental expenses he has incurred. 

No one is working for me in Oklahoma or Arkansas. I do not know J. Eu- 
banks, and he is not associated with me in any way in the work I am doing. 

I have never at any time, or to any person, said that I was a Government 
official in any respect. I have only represented that I am acting and represent- 
ing my people before Congress, and I am getting up these claims for that 
purpose. 

When at Jackson in June, 1910, I had a circular sent out and meant to say 
that I was a representative of my tribe and obtaining applicants for their rights 
as Choctaws and Chickasaws, but by an error my clerk said that I was a 
practicing attorney l)efore the committees of Congress. That was not my 
intention to have it so stated, and I am not responsible for the error. 

The contract forms used by me were worded and made up by Crews and 
Cantwell, and I am not responsible for anything in such wording. 

I, Alec P. Powell, do solemnly swear that the foregoing statement was made 
voluntarily by me, and that it is true in every respect to the- best of my 
knowledge and belief. 

Alexander P. Powell. 

Sworn to and subscribed before me this 27th day of April, 1911, at Jackson, 
Miss. 

W. W. MCCONIHE, 

Special United States Indian Agent. 
Frank B. Lemly, Jackson, Miss. 



Exhibit E. 
mississippi choctaw contract. 

This agreement, made this 5th day of September, 1910, by and between Louis 
Joseph Ryan, now residing at the town of Biloxi, in the county of Harrison, 
State of Mississippi, party of the first part, and Thomas B. Crews and Harry 
J. Cantwell, jointly, parties of the second part, witnesseth : 

That, whereas the party of the first part is entitled, as a Mississippi Choctaw 
or as a descendant of a Mississippi Choctaw, under the laws of the United 
States, to certain rights in the distribution of the tribal property of the Choc- 
taw-Chickasaw Indian Tribe in Oklahoma ; and 

Whereas the party of the first part has been heretofore denied enrollment or 
has had no opportunity to make application for proper enrollment in said rolls 
as a Mississippi Choctaw ; and 

Whereas it is necessary that the party of the first part shall secure the law- 
ful professional services of attorneys for the purpose of presenting such evi- 
dence as the party of the first part may Imve of his status and right as a 
INIississippi Choctaw or a de.scendant of a Mississippi Choctaw, so entitled to 
the rights aforesaid, and for other necessary legal service in establishing and 
securing his rights in the premises; and 

Whereas the party of the first part is without any means or funds to com- 
))(>nsate such attorneys and counsel : 

Now, therefore, the premises considered, the parties of the second part 
jointly agree: 

1 irst. 'r.( r('|)resent the party of the first part as attorneys and counsel in pre- 
senting to the Interior Department sm-li lawful evidence as the party of the 
fii'st part may collect to estalilisli the facts of liis i)edigre(> jind status, and such 
other facts as may he necessary to establish the right claimed. 

Second. To repre.sent as attorneys the party of the first part in all legal pro- 
ceedings before any court, conmiission. or department of the (Government of the 



152 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

United States or the State of Oklahoma, wherever and whenever such riglit may 
be properly and legally tried. 

Third. To present before the committees of Congress proper legal argument 
in sui)port of the right .so claimed or in support of any measure tending to pro- 
vide a remedy for the riglit so claimed. 

Fourth. To furnish party of the fir.st pai't necessary information for the pur- 
pose of enabling him to select to the best advantage any lands that he may be 
entitled to by reason of said right. 

Fifth. To collect all sums of money, lands, and property that may properly 
be collected, selected, and received hereafter by reason of said right, and to 
faithfully pay over and account to said party of the first part for all such sums 
of money and property after deducting the compensation hereinafter pro- 
vided for. 

In consideration of the premises and the agreement of the parties of the 
second part as aforesaid, and of services heretofore rendered by them, the party 
of the first part contracts and agrees to pay and assign, transfer, and convey 
to the parties of the second part 30 per cent of all sums of money, lands, and 
property that may be received by reason of the right claimed, and hereby 
irrevocably appoints the parties of the second part his true and lawful attorneys 
in fact, to do any and all acts in his name, place, and stead as fully and com- 
pletely as he might do in person in and about the subject matter of this agree- 
ment, and to execute such receipts, discharges, and releases as the party of the 
first part might lawfully do, hereby ratifying and confirming all that his said 
attorneys in fact and in law may do in the premises. 

The party of the first part hereby revokes all powers of attorney, if any, here- 
tofore made by him to any person or persons whomsoever, touching said rights 
or interests, and requests that the Interior Department of the United States 
recognize the parties of the second part as his exclusive agents and attorneys 
in the premises. 

And it is hereby specifically agreed that the appointment herein of Thomas P>. 
Crews and Harry J. Cantwell is joint, and that in the event of the death of 
either the survivor shall succeed to all rights and benefits of this agreement, 
and shall perform all of the duties hereunder. 

It is further agreed that by reason of the legal services rendered prior to and 
at the signing of this agreement, in advising the party of the first part as to 
his legal rights, and in consideration of the services heretofore rendered by 
A. P. Powell before the committees of Congress in presenting the claims of the 
class of persons to which the party of the first part belongs, said parties of 
the second part having compensated said A. P. Powell therefor, and in further 
consideration of the absolute agreement herein of the parties of the second 
part to perform the services herein, that the powers herein granted are powers 
coupled with an interest ; and it is agreed that the parties of the second part 
may jointly designate, sulistitute, and appoint, in writing, any competent attor- 
ney or attorneys at law to assist in the i)erformance of the duties of the parties 
of the second part hereunder, and to clothe said person or persons w'ith all the 
powers herein grant(>d to the parties of the second part, the parties of the sec- 
ond part hereby guaranteeing the efliciency and integrity of any and all per- 
sons who may be thus appointed, it being distinctly understood that the com- 
pensation of such persons for such assistance shall not be paid by the party of 
the first part. 

It is further understood and agreed that, in the event it becomes necessary 
under any law now existing or hereafter enacted, that this conti'act shall be 
approved by the Secretary of the Intei'ior ; then, in that event, the Secretary 
of the Interior may, in his discretion, modify the terms of this contract as to 
the compensation to be jiaid the parties of the second part, withont invalidating 
this contract, and said contract as modified by said Secretary of the Interior 
shall be binding upon the parties hereto, provided always that the compensa- 
tion fixed by the Secretary of the Interior shall in no event exceed the per- 
centage above stated. 

Executed in duplicate. 

In witness whereof the parties hereto have hereunto set their hands the day 
and year first above written. 

Signed and delivered in presence of: 



INDIAN APPKOPEIATION BD.L, 1011. Ic3 

State of , County of , s.s : 

Before me, , a ■ . in and for said county and State, 

on this day of , 191 — , personally appeared and 

, to me known to be the identical person who executed the within 

and foregoing instrument, and acknowledged to me that executed the 

same as free and voluntary act and deed for the uses and purposes 

therein set forth. 

In witness whereof I have hei-eunto set my hand and official seal at said 
<*ountv the dav and year last above written. 



Exhibit J. 
To whoiu a mail ronccrn: 

This is to certify that I, Alexander P. Powell, a representative of the Choc- 
taw Tribe of Indians now engaged in soliciting contracts with Mississippi 
Clioctaws for services to be rendered in prosecuting their claim before the 
different branches of the Government, in order to secure for them a reopening 
of the rolls of those entitled to share in the tribal property belonging to the 
Choctaw Tril>e in tlie State of Oklahoma, am acting in my individual capacity 
and for the benefit of myself and those associated with me in this effort to 
secure the right of said Indians in said property. 

I further certify that I am in no numner employed or engaged l)y the United 
States Government to solicit any contract with said Indians or yierform any 
duty in connection therein. 
Respectfully, 

Alexander P. I'owell. 

NOTICE TO INDIANS. 

This is your last chance in connection with William R. J^Iathews, attorney 
at law. Evans Building, Washington. D. C. I am engaged in writing uii claims 
of all Mississippi Choctaws and their descendants who remained in Mississippi 
after Dancing Rabbit Creek treaty with the United States Government in 18.30. 

I will remain here for a few days only ; I will be glad to write up all bene- 
ficiaries ; we intend to sulimit all claims to the Sixty-second Congress, which 
convenes in Washington, D. C, April 4, 1911. I am Indian and Spaniard, and 
my grandfather was a signer of the great treaty concluded September 27, 1830. 

Alexander P. Powell. 

Philadelphia, Mlss. 

notice to indians and their descendants in connection with hon. harry 

peyton, room 420 dond building, washinfiton, ». c. 

This is your last chance to secure benefits under the bill introduced by Hon. 
Pat Harri.son, of the sixth district of Mississippi, now pending before the 
Sixty-second ('ongress, for the relief of Mississippi Choctaws and their descend- 
ants who remained in Mississippi after the treaty of 1830. 

I am an Indian and a Spaniard and my grandfather was a signer of the 
treaty of 1830. 

I will be glad to write up all bent'ficiaries, and I have in my possession 
a record (hat will enable you to trace your ancestors back to 1780. 

Those with negro blood need not apply. 

I will be at Miss., on the day of , 1912. 

Alexander P. Powell, 
tfo. 106 Fourth Avenue, Laurel, Mifis. 
Office: Room Ji20, Bond Building, Washington, D. C. 

(This paper was sent to Indian Odice by Mrs. Viola Strickland, of Meridian, 
Miss., No. 1400 Tenth Avenue, under date of Sept. 16, 1912.) 



THIS IS YOUR LAST CHANCE — NOTICE TO THE ONCE MIGHTY TRIHE OF RED MEN WHO 
ONCE OWNED THIS COUNTRY AND TO THEIR DESCENDANTS. 

In connection with Hon. Harry Peyton, room 408, and Hon. Oliver A. 
Phelps, room 619, Bond Building, Washington, D. C, I am still engaged in 
writing up all Mississippi Choctaws and their descendants who remained in 



154 INDIAN APPEOPRIATIOX BILL, 1917. 

Mississippi after tlie Dancing Rabbit Creek treaty witli tlie Uuitod States 
Government, concluded September 27. 1830. 

The treaty of 1830. known as the treaty of " Perpetual friendship," pro- 
vides that tiie Indian Territory shall so to the red man and his descendants 
" as long as water runs and grass grows." The treaty, furthermore, provided 
that our descendants that did not see fit to go to the Territory then, at any 
time that they may take a notion to come on and join the tril)e in the Territory 
they shall share in this distribution as long "as water runs and grass grows." 
If your ancestors were born east of the Mississipi)i River, call on me. It is 
possible tliat some of them may have been at the treaty mentioned above. 

I am an Indian and a Spaniard, and my grandfather, Nita. was a signer of 
the treaty of 1830. 

I have in my possession a record of the old aboriginal that will permit you 
to trace your Indian ancestiy back as far as 1780. 

All Mississippi Choctaw cases are now pending before Counuittee on Indian 
Affairs, Sixty-third Congress, first session, waiting for report and decision. I 
will be glad to write up all beneficiaries. 

Those with negro blood need not apuly. 

I wiU be at W. J. Nelson's, 802 Second Street, Lake Charles, La., on Sep- 
tember 5. 

ArEXANDER p. Powell. 



NOTICE TO MISSISSII'PI CHOCTAWS. 

In connection with Harry J. Cantwell, Thomas L. Crews, and William B. 
Matthews, attorneys of Washington, 1). C., I am still engaged in writing up 
claims for the Choctaw-Chickasaw Indians and their descendants who remained 
in ^Mississippi after the Dancing Ixabbit Creek treaty with the United States 
Government. I am a member of the Choctav*- Tribe of Indians, and my grand- 
fa thei- was a signer of the great treaty made September 27, 1830. I will be glad 
to conununicate with any beneficiary at my otHce in Bay St. Louis. Miss. 

A. P. Powell, 
Scdbrook Hotel, Bdij St. Louis, Miss. 



" INDIANS " LIVING IN OLD MISSISSIPPI. 

"All Mississippi Choctaw Indians and their descendants are asked to meet at 
the county courthouse next Sunday afternoon at 2 o'clock. The object of the 
meeting is to further the rights contained in the treaty of 1830 between the 
United States and Choctaws. (Biloxi Herald.)" 

To which is answered : Such a meeting as is scheduled as per the above would 
be " nuts " for some moving-picture company, provided such meeting is attended 
by all the people who have filed claims as descendants of the tribe of red men 
known as Choctaws. They are of all shades and color, running from the real 
Indian to the coal-black, thick-lipped, flat-nosed, kinky-headed negro, with a good 
sprinkling of whites, in whose veins no one Itnt themselves ever susi)ected that a 
drop of Indian blood llowed. But anything goes in this day and generation when 
the thought of " easy money " presents itself. Uncle Sam's coffers will scarcely 
be opened for the motley crew, however just may be the claims of some of the 
pure-bred Choctaws. (Gulf Coast Progress.) 

HOUSTON investors MAY GET MILLIONS FROM INDIAN CLAIM. 

A Houston organization, in which more than $2,500,000 is at stake and the 
hereditary rights of the Choctaw Tribe of Mississippi is the merchandise, has 
received quite a boost 'in a telegram received by Judge Harris Masterson. 
Many Iloustonians are interested in the enterprise. The telegram reads as 
follows : 

" Subcommittee report of Friday last was unanimous and recommends admis- 
sion of all full bloods, also all others who can prove descent from one who 
either received or should have received patent under fourteenth article treaty 
of 1830. Meetings are executive and no arguments being heard." 

To those who are not interested in the venture the telegram needs interpre- 
tation. It comes from Washington and has to do with a bill introduced by 
Mr. Harrison, of IMississippi. in behalf of the admission to enrollment of the 
Mississippi Choctaw Indians and their descendants to participation in the 
money and lands belonging to the Choctaw Tribe. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL^ 1917. 155 

Some time ago Judge Masterson was instrumental in forming an organization 
to urge the claim of the Choctaw Tribe in a participation of certain lands in the 
Territories and moneys in the United States Treasury. Many of these Indians 
were his clients. Going rather deeply into the matter he banded over 4,000 
of these claimants together and became their representative and legal adviser. 

Money was needed to carry the enterprise through, and a company was 
formed. Between ,50 and GO men came into the company, and many of these 
are prominent Houstonians. 

Judge Masterson says that the venture is one whicli promises tremendous 
returns for the amount invested by the stockholders and that he is confident 
Congress will give assent to the recommendations of the subcommittee. 

WOULD RESTORE CHOCTAW INDIAN PENSION BILLS. 

[Associated Press. 1 

Washington, December 13. 

The bill introduced in the House last session by Representative Harrison, 
providing reopening of rolls of the Chickasaw-Clioctaw Indian Tribes, came up 
for consideration in the House yesterday. A vote was not reached. In his 
speecli in favor of the bill Mr. Harrison said, in part : 

" The Mississippi Choctaws have been woefully neglected and unmercifully 
treated. They acquired rights under the fourteenth article of the treaty of 
1830 that the United States Government has never fairly and .justly recognized. 
Every act of Congress passed with respect to the Mississippi Clioctaws has 
violated the spirit and the letter of that article of the treaty. 

" The Oklahoma Choctaws were permitted l\v act of Congress in 1881 to sue 
the United States Government, in wliich suit they recovered from the Govern- 
ment $8,000,000 for damages done to the Mississippi Choctaws in Mississippi. 
Sclieming attorneys, representing the tribe, dictate agreements, suggest, lobby 
for, and have passed ]n\YS that not only make it impossible for the Mississippi 
Choctaws to be enrolled upon tribal rolls, but through their influence they have 
actually created courts to prevent or exclude the Mississippi Choctaws from 
being enrolled. One of the blackest spots in the history of the administration 
of the Choctaw Nation is the escapades practiced in the citizenship court. 

" The Mississippi Choctaw is a part of that great Indian nation which never 
i-aised a tomahawk against an American citizen. Thousands of her warriors 
displayed their heroism under Jackson at New Orleans." 

[Alexander P. Powell, representative Mississippi Clioctaw Indians ; ofHce. room 408, Bond 
Building, Washington, D. C. ; .3.31 Pine Street, Laurel, Miss.] 

SiiuEVEPORT, L.\., October 28, 1913. 
Mr. CoLt'MBT's Overman, 

Dexter, Kana. 
Dear Sir: Yours of recent date to hand. Beg to advise that I have already 
written up a number of your relatives under their great-great-grandmother 
Delilah, who was an Indian woman, and if you wish to be written up. on receipt 
of .$2.50, which I require for recording fee, etc., I will send you blanks to be 
filled out. I do not charge you any fee, but wlien I collect for you I get 20 
per cent of collections. 

I am also inclosing you a Pat Ilarri.son bill and other literature and you can 
see for yourself how the case stands. 

Yours, truly, . .\lexandeu 1'. Powell. 



Hon. Alexander P. Powell, 



1913. 



Dear Sir: Being a Choctaw descendant and desiring to make application for 
compensation for the violation of my rights under the treaty of 1830, between 
the Choctaw Nation and the United States Government, and being unable to go 
to your ofiice for that purpose, I do hereby request that you come at your 

earliest convenience to , my place of residence, for tliat purpose, and I 

agree to rtMiiiburse you the necessary expense of your trip to and from said 
place, provided the .same shall not exceed the sum of $2.50. 



Witness : 



156 i:n'diax appeopeiatiox bill, 191:. 



MKJCORAXnrM OF EVIDENCE. 



In the matter of , Mississipi (Jlioctaws 

Full name, • — . 

Post-oflice address, . 

When and where were you born? 



Is there any oflicial record of your birth or baptism? If so, state where. 



Father's name. . 

If living, state post-oihce address. 

If dead, state date and place of his deatli. 

Mother's maiden name, . 

If living, state post-office address. ■ • 

If dead, state date and place of lier death. 

When and where were your parents married? . 

Is there any record of the marriage? If so, state where. . 

What was the name of your father's father? . 

When did he die, and where? . 

What was the name of your father's mother? ■ • . 

When and where did slie die? . 

Wliat was the name of your mother's father? . 

AVhen and wliere did he die? . 

What was the name of your mother's mother? . 

When and where did she die? . 

What is the name of ancestors who received land or script under the treaty 
of 1830? ■ . 

How can you prove your de.scent from him or her? . 

Give name and address of all witnesses as to your descent from such ancestor, 
and refer to all churcli records which can give any information. . 

Did you ever go to Oivlahoma to mal^e application for enrollment on Choctaw 
rolls ? . 

Have you ever made settlement on any lands in Oklahoma? If so, describe 
same. . 



Where were you denied enrollment? . 

Have you any documents proving your pedigree? Where are they? If so, 

attach or submit them. . 

Are any of your relatives now on the rolls of the Choctaw? 



Give names of friends and neighbors who can testify to any matter of interest 
regarding your pedigree. 

ADDRESS. 



Are any of your relatives now on tlie rolls of the Choctaw-Chickasaw Tribe 
as a I\Iississii)pi Clioctaw? If so, give names and address and number on 
roll. . 

If you can, give a description of the land your ancestors received in Missis- 
sippi under the treaty of 1830. . 

State of Mississippi, , County of . 



, being duly sworn upon h — oath, deposes and says that the 

matters and things .set forth in the foregoing statement are true to the best 
of h — knowledge and belief. 

Subscrijiod and sworn to before me this day of , 191 — . 

-, Notary PuMic. 



INDIAN APPKOPEIATION BILL, 1917. 157 

Mr. Ferris. Now, the estimated expenses of collecting he deducts, 
which he says will be $150,000, which leaves them the pitiful sum of 
$3,094,223. 

Mr. Snyder. He hasn't got it yet. 

Mr. Ferris. Not yet, and they never should get it. I know no 
committee will ever countenance such a performance as that for 
a minute, But he does do — they come before Congress and try to 
create doubt and confuse the minds of the Members so they will 
not do what they ought to do, give the Oklahoma people their 
money. 

Mr. Dill. Has he any contracts with these Indians that are pro- 
vided for in this bill ? 

Mr. Ferris. No. 

Mr. Dill. Then if this legislation passed he would not get anything ? 

Mr. Ferris. No. These are the regularly enrolled people that are 
to get this money direct. It is these outside people brought here by 
perjured convicts' testimony, witnesses who can neither read or 
write, without conscience, soul, or decency to tell the truth on any 
subject, that he has contracts with. 

Mr. Harrisox. Do they represent any Indians already identified 
by the Dawes Commission or by McKinnon '( I do not think they do. 

Mr. Ferris. The}^ say they do. I have it right here. Let me 
read what they say. They claim to represent over 2,000 indigent 
Indians. 

Mr. Carter. Let me ask the gentlemen, did Mr. Ballinger state in 
his testimony that he represented those people ? 

Mr. Ferris. Let me pause long enough to say that I do not at- 
tempt to throw the slightest shadow upon the distinguished and able 
gentleman from Mississippi or any of his people. They are warm- 
hearted, lovable people, ai:d would not do a wrong if they knew it. 
And I know the gejUleman from Mississippi does not approve of this 
performance; but let me urge of him, in deference to his good name, 
and in deference to his ability, honor, aiul standing in this House, if 
he does not think he is treadhig on awfully dangerous grouiul to be 
continually fighting in the same trench with this band of wolves and 
hyenas that would rob our people of the last dollar they had ? And 
I say to you, Mr. Chairman, that the Oklahoma Indians will never 
have a moment's peace as long as they have a mite to their names or 
a dollar in their pocket but wliat some attorney will be tryiiig to 
filch and rob them of it. And I think that a people who for nearly 
100 years have been faithful, law-a])i(ling citizens, who have served 
both in the Army of the Union and in the Rebellion, that it is time 
they have their peace and be free from this persecution, and the only 
way to do it, my friends, is to give them their money that they are 
entitled to. 

Do you know, gentlemen of the connnittee, that at. the time 
Congressman Carter and Senator Owcui came to the Congress they 
could not sell tlieir own lands ^ H\c Indians of the Five Civilized 
Tribes have been, most of them, well educated for 50 years, and it 
is very humiliating to them. It is wrong. This provision ought 
to bo rewritten, and it ought to direct the Secretary of the Interior 
to do exactly what the Atoka agreement says they will do and give 
them every cent of their money. That is what ought to be done. 
The Atoka agreement, which caused the Indians to let the white 



158 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, lt)l7. 

settlers come in there — they only agreed to the Atoka treaty when 
Congress agreed to distril)ute their money when it was paid in. 
The Cm'tis bill which vitalized this — I have it here — carried a pro- 
vision — section 17, as I recall — directing that within a year after 
the money was collected it should be distributed to them. It is 
their money. We do not ask, as I am informed in the language in 
the bill, that we are fearful that there may be some of our own 
people that will need something later on; but, gentlemen, we do 
ask that this payment be made, and if it is changed at all it ought 
to be increased. I know it is not your M^ish that these Indians suffer 
longer. 

I want to saj- to my friend, Air. Harrison, that the Indians of 
Oklahotna for nearly 100 years beckoned to his people to come over to 
Oklahoma and help build up that new State, but they remained 
behind. They would not come, and they will not come now. He 
does not propose to have them come. He is not in favor of having 
them come now. He wants to lug some of the money from our 
Indians who went out on the frontier and took the hardships back 
to Mississippi and give it to his own people, so that they in turn 
can give 40 per cent of it to these attorneys. 

Mr. Harrison. The gentleman is mistaken about my wanting to 
give it to the attorneys. I think you can ^\Tite a provisioii in there 
that will prevent that. 

Mr. Ferris. That is iridescent dream, hke ships that pass in the 
night. We have tried to choke off these attorneys before and have 
failed. They are getting fees all the time at the Indian Office that 
they v.'ould not get if we could stop it. 

Now just let me say three or four words more. Four Secretaries 
of the Interior have said that these people shall not ])e enrolled wliile 
the}'' live in Mississippi; that they are not entitled to be enrolled under 
the law or the facts. The Federal court said the same thing; the 
Supreme Court said it ^\ben they dismissed their case on their own 
motion. When the appellant dismisses his own case he assumes and 
accepts the judgment of the Federal court, as he did in this case, 
and it becomes a final judgment just as effectually as though the court 
had rendered a decision. 

^ir. Harrison. Isn't it i)urely a question of jurisdiction ? 

Mr. Ferris. No; the appellants dismissed their own case. The 
appellants, I repeat, dismissed their own case. The attorneys for the 
appellants dismissed their case. 

Mr. Harrison. That is very true, but the court held they did not 
go into the merits of the ])roposition. 

Mr. Ferris. Of course they did not, because the attorne3's for the 
appellants did not give them a chance to, and as Congress also said 
Judge Clayton, the Federal judge, had final jurisdiction. 

I repeat, four Secretaries of the Interior have held that these 
people hud no rights, beginning with James Rudol])h Garfield, 
Seciretary of the Interior when I came to Congress; later Mr. BalUnger, 
wlio was the next Secretary, an.d later Walter Fislier, and next Sec- 
retary Lane, who is the present Secretary^ in the strongest khid of a 
letter last year and again this year. 

The CjtairiMan. Didn't Secretary Hitchcock also pass on this 
question ? 



INDIAN APPKOPEIATION BILL, 1017, 159 

IMt'. Ferris. Perhaps he did, but that was before I came to Con- 
gress. And Congress itself, by the solemn act of April 27, 1906, says 
these rolls shall be forever closed Maich 4, 1906. Is there i\o time 
when these people caii have their peace? Is there no time that these 
people can be through trying this fourteenth article ? 

Now I beg your pardon for taking so much of your tune. I have 
all the records here and would like to go over them with you. 

Mr. Carter. How long were these rolls held open for the Missis- 
sippi Choctaws ? 

Mr. Ferris. From 1830 up until 1890 every Indian who came from 
Mississippi was enrolled. There is no question about that at all, for 
that period of 60 years, and then from 1890 to 1907, a period of 17 
years, there was a body created by Congress to determine who should 
and who should not be enrolled. Now will you gentlemen, after 
60 years of tiie rolls being free and easy and absolutely opeii, and 
after 17 years of holding them open as a judicial body to pass upon 
it, ^viil you yet hold these rolls open longer? And more than thut, 
will you continue to hold the money away from the Indians that 
Congress has solemnh agreed to give them ? 

Mr. Carter. Let me ask another question. Wliat time was nec- 
essary for a native Choctaw to be on the reservation in order to be 
enrolled ? 

Mr. Ferris. I have not that in mind. 

Mr. Carter. It was June 28, 1898. How much time after that 
could the Mississippi Choctaw come upon the reservation and be 
enrolled ? 

Mr. Ferris. He was given the first six months and a vear after that. 

Mr. Carter. Until March 4, 1907. 

Mr. Ferris. He was given to the 4th of March 1907 ? 

Mr. Carter. Yes. 

Mr. Dill. How long has this money it is proposed to pay to these 
Indians })ecn available for payment ? 

Mr. Thompsox. The money is available — perhaps not all of it yet. 
There are several million dollars here now available for payment. 

Mr. Dill. How long is tlie money that is proposed to be paid by 
this legislation been available ? 

Mr. Ferris. Some 9 or 10 years. 

Mr. Dill. Has it been drawing interest? 

Mr. Ferris. Yes; part of it has, and part of it has not. I also 
desire to incorporate the report of Secretary Lane on this saiue propo- 
sition last year. 

rkport of the secretary of the interior on' the harrison" bill (ll. r. 1258f), 

The Secretary of the Interior, 

Washwgton, Januai-y S, 1915. 

My Dear Mr. Stephens: I have the honor to refer herein to a commnnifation of 
August 12. 1014, from Hfni. C. D. Carter, then actine: chairman of the Committee on 
Indian Affairs of the lIon.se of Representatives, with vluch was inclo.sed a copy of 
H. R. 12580. entitled "A l)ill to reopen the rolls of the Clioctaw-Chickasaw Tribe and 
to pro\-ide for the awarding: of the ris.'ht.=! secured to certain persons by the fourteenth 
article of the treaty of Dancine; Rabbit Creek, of date of September 27, 1830." He 
also referred to 11. R. 4536 and requested that 1 consider the two bills together and 
make a report thereon. 

Upon examination of IT. R. 4536 T find that .said bill is identical with II. R. ]!i213. 
introduced by Mr. Harri.«on of Mississipjii in the Sixty-second Congress, second ses- 
sion, upon which last-mentioned bill the department submitted to your committee a 



160 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

report dated July 2. 1912. H. R. 12586, introduced in the present Congress by Mr. 
Harrison, is a similar bill to the above-mentioned bills, except that in said H, R. 12586 
an additional paratcraph is included in section 2 to pro^•ide for the enrollment of all 
persons who were identified as Mississippi Choctaws by the Dawes Commission in its 
report of March 10, 1899, commonly known as the McKennon roll, and of all persons 
identified as Mississippi Choctaws by the Dawes Commission from ^larch 10, 1899. to 
March 4, 1907, whose identification was approved by the Secretary of the Interior, 
but whose names did not appear on the final citizenship rolls of the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations. 

The claims of Mississippi Choctaw Indians to recognition as citizens of the Choctaw 
Nation of Oklahoma and to share in the property of said nation are based upon article 
14 of the treaty of September 27, 1830 (7 Stat., L. 335). Pursuant to the terms of the 
treaty, a large number of Choetaws were transferred from Mississippi to the country 
west, later known as Indian Territory. These Choctaws who so removed and their 
descendants now constitute the main'bod\ of what is known as the Choctaw Nation. 
There were, however, a considerable number of Choctaws R'ho remained behind in 
Mississippi, some of them under the pro\'isions of article 14 above mentioned. 

Said article 14 provided that the persons who claimed thereunder should not lose 
the priviletje of a Choctaw citizen, but if they ever removed were not to be entitled 
to any parf of the Choctaw annuity. The Indians who remained behind under the 
provisions of said article 14 received either land in Mississippi or scrip, which gave 
the applicants the right to enter public lands in certain Southern States. A part of 
saidscrip, however, was latei commuted by a money payment. Some of the fourteenth- 
article claimants later mado their way West and joined the main body of the tribe in 
the Indian Territory. The Choctaw Council by various acts recognized the right of 
said absentee Mississippi Choctaws to remove to the Nation, and actually invited them 
to do so. 

Under the provisions of the Atoka agreement with the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Tribes contained in the act of Congress of June 28, 1898 (30 Stat. L., 495), the supple- 
mental agreement contained in the act of July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. L., 641), and later acts 
of Congress for the purpose of carrying out the proA-isions of said agreements, the claims 
of individual Mississippi Choctaw Indians to be identified and to be enrolled as 
entitled to share in the property of the Choctaw Nation were fully considered by the 
Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes and by the department after full hearing, 
at which the claimants had ample opportunity to present all the evidence which they 
could procure in support of their claims. Veiy few claimants were able to prove 
descent from an ancestor who received or applied for benefits under the provisions 
of article 14 of the treaty of 1830. .... 

The history of the Dawes Commission enrollment work relative to Mississippi 
Choctaw claimants is verv fuUv set out in a communication of April 14, 1914, from 
"William O. Beall, at one time secretary of the cornmission to the Five Civilized 
Tribes. A copy thereof is inclosed for your information. 

For your further information as to the history, of the Mississippi Choctaw claims 
and of the department action in the preparation of the final rolls there is inclosed a 
copy of department letter of July 2, 1912, to the chairman of the Committee on Indian 
Affairs of the House of Representatives. 

Judge ^^■illiam H. 11. Clayton in his decision in the case of Jack Amos v. The Choctaw 
Nation, a copy of which may be found in the appendix of the annual report of the 
C immission to the Five Ci\alized Tribes for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1901, 
said that no treaty or acts of the Choctaw Council or of any oflScer of the Choctaw 
Council since the "treaty of 1830 could l)e cited, or at least he had not found them, 
whereby any right or privilege had been conferred, granted, or recognized m or to a 
Mississippi Choctaw so long as he remained away from his people, and that no right 
was recognized or conferred upon such absent Indian except upon the condition that 
he should remove to the nation, and the right was not to be consummated or enjoyed 
until actual removal. 

Mississippi (Tio.'taw Indians who, while the opportunity was theirs under the 
privih-ges accorded them refused to emigrate with the tribe to the new coiintry west, 
and who never shared in the burdens and hardships of the pioneer life incident to the 
establishment of the new tribal government west of the Mississippi, hare at this late 
date (now that the tribal pr'per'tv oi the Choctaw Nation made valuable by the emi- 
grants is being divided per capita among the enrolled lecognized citizens of the 
nation) no equitable ri ;ht to .«hare in said i)ro])ertv. 

With respect to the persons who were identified by the Eawes Commission as Mis- 
sissippi Choctaws under the provisions of the act of Congress of June 28, 1898 (30 Stat. 
L.. 495), but who failed to remove and make settlement in the Choctaw-Chickasaw 



INDIAN APPBOPEIATIOX BILL, 1917. 161 

country, as required by the act of Congress of July 1. 1902 (32 Stat. L., 641, sees. 41, 42, 
43, and 44), it may be said that, irrespective of their unfortunate condition of poverty 
and ignorance, there is no ground, legal or equitable, for holding the ( hoctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations responsible for the failure of said identified persons to comply with 
the law as to removal and settlement. No obligation rested upon the United States 
to provide means for the removal of such Indians. 

Referring to the class of claimants whose names were contained in an identification 
roll submitted by the Commission to the 1 ive Civilized Tribes on March 10, 1899, but 
never approved by the Secretary of the Interior, your attention is invited to the fact 
that the commission soon recognized the inaccuracy and incompleteness of that roll 
and requested the department to di.sregard it and to return the same to the commission. 
In order that there might be no doubt as to the standing of said roll, it was disapproved 
by the department on Marc h 1 , 1907. The larger part of the persons whose names were 
contained in that disapproved roll were afterwards placed on the approved identi- 
fication rolls, and those who complied with the law as to removal and settlement were 
enrolled on the linal rolls of Mississippi (hoctaw Indians. 

In the investigation and examination of Mississippi Choctaw claims made in 1900 
and the years following by the Commission to the j ive Ci\ilized Tribes every effort 
that was possible to be made was made by said commission to reach all persons who had 
any equitable claim to recognition as Mississippi Choctaws, and especially to find those 
who were full-blood Choctaw Indians. 

H. R. 4536 and 12586 in effect pro\ide, so far as the Mississippi Choctaw claimants 
are concerned, a general reopening of the rolls of the Choctaw Nation, necessitating 
a review of all the cases which had been adversely decided by the Unitecl States courts, 
the Department of the Interior, and the Chcictaw and Chickasaw Citizenship Court, 
as well as the consideration of claims not heretofore presented or considered, and 
empower the Secretary of the Interior to determine the rights of the claimants upon 
such evidence as may be produced by the applicants, without regard to any adverse 
judgment or decision heretofore rendered by any court or commission to the Five 
Civilized Tribes, or the Department of the Interior, and without regard to any con- 
dition or disability heretofore imposed by any act of Congress. 

The records of the department show that Mi.ssis.sippi Choctaw claimants have been 
to an unusual extent the \dctims of numerous extortionate contracts, and the corres- 
pondence in many cases indicates that contracts were obtained through misrepresenta- 
tions as to -the facts, and in some cases that such contracts were obtained from claim- 
ants who believed that the persons obtaining the contracts were Government agents. 
Your attention is invited to the report of Inspector McLaughlin, of this department, 
which report appears in print in the Congressional Record of July 10, 1914, commenc- 
ing on page 13022. 

Referring to section 9 of said bills, I am of the opinion that, in view of the large 
amount of tribal property yet to be disposed of and of other matters affecting the tribes, 
it would be inadvisable to abolish the tribal organization of the Choctaw and ( -hickasaw 
Nations at the present time. 

In view of the facts as presented to me, I am of the opinion that no legislation 
should be enacted for the reopening of the rolls of the Choctaw Nation for the benefit 
of the Mississippi Choctaw claimants. 
Very truly, yours, 

FuANKLiN K. Lane. 

Hon. John H. Stephens, . 

Chairman Committee on Indian Affair.", 

Iloase of Representatives. 

SocTotary Ballingcr on February 12, 1910, opposed the reopening 
of the rolls. Writing the vSenate Committee on IiuHan Affairs, he 
said : 

In conc-lusion, I am constrained to believe, and therefore recommend, that the rolls 
be not opened up, but that prcjpcr legal authority be given the Secretary of the Interior 
to place upon the rolls tho.se Indians (about 52 in number) whose applications were 
approved by the (Commissioner to the Five Civilized Tribes and were transmitted to 
Washington before the 4th of March, 1907, but did not reach the department until 
after the rolls were clo.sed; and, furthermore, that proper authority be given the 
Secretary of the Interior to examine and place upon the rolls the minor orphan chil- 
dren inc-ompetents, and Indians in incarceration whose claims were not presented in 
due time for adjuclication. I am informed that this class numbers about 2(K). No 

25131— FT 4— 16 11 



162 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, 1917. 

one seems to have taken the responsibility of presenting the claims of this class for 
consideration. They could not look after their own interests. (See S. Doc. No. 1139, 
62d Cong., 3d sess.) 

Assistant Secretary Samuel Adams on July 2, 1912, reported against 
the enrollment of the Mississippi Choetaws. After reviewing their 
case at length, he stated: "In fact, it may be urged by the tribes 
that respon.5ibihty if any, rested upon the United States instead," 
and concluded as follows: "In view of the fact stated above, I am 
of the opinion that the bill (referring to the Harrison bill to enroll the 
Mississippi Choetaws) should not be enacted into law." 

Assistant Commissioner of Indian Affairs Meritt, in recommending 
this payment while before the subcommittee on December 20, 1915, 
made the following statement: 

Inasmuch as a $100 per capita payment was made to the enrolled members of the 
Chickasaw Nation under the act of August 1, 1914, at which time no payment was 
made to the enrolled members of the Choctaw Nation, it is therefore recommended 
that the enrolled members of the Choctaw Nation should be paid SlOO per capita more 
than the amount provided for the enrolled members of the CMckasaw Nation. These 
payments would be made from the tribal funds belonging to the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Nations and would not be a tax on the Federal Treasury. 

STATEMENT OF HON. W. W. HASTINGS, REPRESENTATIVE IN 
CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA. 

Mr. Hastings. It is perfectly apparent, Mr. Chairman and gentle- 
men of the committee, that I can not go into any extended argument 
on this question of citizenship at this time. However, Mi'. Ferris 
and Mr. Thompson have dealt with the question so elaborately that 
I think it entirely unnecessary. I might say to the committee, 
however, for the benefit of the record that I would like to ask in 
advance the privilege of inserting in the record an argument which I 
have prepared upon this question. 

The Chairman. Without objection it may be inserted. 

(The argument referred to is as follows:) 

The question under consideration is not a difficult one, nor will it be necessary to 
consume much time in its discussion. It is proposed by this amendment to direct 
the Secretary of the Interior to pay to the enrolled members of the Choctaw Tribe, 
entitled under existing law, |200 per capita out of their own moneys, and the Chicka- 
saws $100 per capita out of their funds. They should be paid more — the Choetaws 
|300 and the Chickasaws $200 per capita. 

The statement of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, found on pages 336 and 337 
of the hearings before the committee, in justification of the item under consideration, 
shows that there is to the credit of the Choetaws tribal funds aggregating $7,432,353.24 
and that there is to the credit of the Chickasaws tribal funds amounting to $1,922,110.48, 
or a total of $9,354,463.72 in both funds. The justification further invites attention to 
the additional property owned by the Chickasaw and Choctaw people, including 
unsold lands and other proi)erty. It is estimated that the entire value of their prop- 
erty approximates $31,503,954.95. 

There are 20,799 enrolled members of the Choctaw Tribe entitled to share in this 
distribution and 6,304 Chickasaws. A per capita payment of $100 was made to the 
members of the Chickasaw Tribe a little more than a year ago, which is the reason for 
the payment to the Choetaws now of $100 more than to the Chickasaws. 

The members of the two tribes have an undi"\ided equal interest in and to the lands 
and funds of both tribes, being separated only for political purposes. A per capita 
payment of $200 to the Choetaws would aggregate $4,159,800, and $100 to the Chicka- 
saws would amount to $630,400, and to both Choetaws and Chickasaw^s $4,790,200. 
Hence, it will clearly be seen that $300 could be ])aid to the Choetaws and $200 to 
the Chickasaws, which would only require $7,600,500, leading a balance of $1,753,- 
963.72 in the Treasury, in addition to more than $22,000,000 worth of property not 
converted into cash. 



01 
INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL^ 1917. 163 

■When the Dawes Commission was created 1)y the act of March 3, 1893, the Choc- 
taw people had their own ijo^ernment with about as much soyereii,'nty as a State of 
the Union. They had their own constitution and hiws, their own governor, their 
own courts, and tlieir own legishiture. They made, executed, and enforced their 
own hxws, appro])riated their own money, and conducted their own schools. Rail- 
roads were built through the Indian Territory, towns sprang up, and white people 
from almost every State in the Union came among them. Finally, the Choctaws 
yielded to the pressure of the Government and signed a treaty at Atoka on April 23, 
1897 (30 Stat., 495), providing in detail for the allotment of their lands amongthe 
enrolled members of the tribe, the making of the rolls, the disposition of town sites, 
and in fact an adjustment of all their relations with the Government of the United 
States. This agreement looked to the members of the Choctaw Nation becoming 
citizens of the United States and the creation of a State out of the lands held by the 
Five Civilized Tribes. 

The act of March 3, 1893 (27 Stat., G12, sec. 16), creating the Dawes Commission, 
stated that it was — 

"To enable the ultimate creation of a State or States of the Union which shall em- 
brace the lands within said Indian Territory." 

The members of the Choctaw Trilje accepted these promises and their lands were 
allotted. Almost 19 years have elapsed since this treaty was ratified. A very large 
percentage of the Choctaws have died, but with the exception of a small per capita 
payment of $50, none of their moneys have been disturbed. The members of the 
Choctaw Tribe were allotted large areas of land. They had to build houses upon their 
allotments, clear up their fields, place fences along section lines, and otherwise im- 
prove their farms. *rhey are greatly in need of a distribution of their own money, in 
order to accomplish these purposes. The Government can not justify itself in longer 
withholding a partial distribution. 

The supplemental agreement ratified by the act of July 1, 1902 (32 Stat., 641), 
section 14, promises a distribution of the moneys per capita (p. 391) among the mem- 
bers of the tribe, when their allotments shoukl be made and their property disposed 
of. They now have more than S9,000.000 to their credit, and certainly this amount 
should be distiibuted among their own members. There is really no argument what- 
ever against the distribution of this money, but every argument in its favor. One- 
fourth of the entire membership of the tribe is now dead and never received any part 
of their money. In mv judgment, it is a legislative crime against them to longer with 
hold it. 

CITIZENSHIP QUESTION. 

The only argument urged against the distribution of this money is that certain 
Mississippi Choctaw claimants to citizenship should be provided for, that the money 
hereinabove referred to as being Choctaw tribal funds, is a trust fund, and that the 
claimants to citizenshi]> have some legal right thereto. It is to this question that I 
desire to address myself. 

Many Members of Congress and good lawyers throughout the United States do not 
understand the citizenship question among the Five Civilized Tribes. They think 
it is a question of inheritance. This is a niistake. It requires three things to con- 
stitute citizenship in aiiy of the I^ive Civilized Tribes: 

1. You must be an Indian of the tribe by blood. 

2. You must be a recognized enrolled member of the tribe. 

3. You must be a resident of the tribe. 

A great many people think that it is only a question of blood. However, many 
people of Choctaw and Cherokee blood reside in numerous States throughout the 
Union, but they are not members of the tribe. They are not residents of the tribe, 
and even if thev are of the full quantum of Indian blood they are not entitled to 
enrollment. This question has been decided by every court to which it has been 
presented. 

The promise of a patent by article 2, treaty of 1830 (7 Stat. L., 335), to the Choctaws 
provided that the lands granted the Choctaws should be theirs "as long as they exist 
as a nation and live on it." 

"Art. 2. The United States, under a grant specially to ])e made by the President 
of the United States, shall cause to be conveyed to the Choctaw Nation a tract of 
country west of the Misslssipjji lliver, in fee simple to them and their descendents, 
to inure to them while they shall exist as a nation and live on it." 

And article 3 of said treaty is as follows: 

"In consideration of the ])rovisions contained in the several ai tides of this treaty, 
the Choctaw Nation of Indians consent and hereby cede to the United States the 
entire country they own and possess east of the Mississippi River; and they agree to 



164 INDIAN APPROrEIATION BILL, 1917. 

remove beyond the Mississippi River as early as practicable and will so arrange their 
removal that as many as possible of their people, not exceeding one-half of the whole 
number, shall depart during the falls of 1831 and 1832, the residue to follow during 
the succeeding fall of 1833; a better opportunity in this manner will be afforded the 
Government to extend to them the facilities and comforts which it is desirable should 
be extended in conveying them to their new homes." 

The patent executed by President Tyler in 1842 contained a similar provision, and 
is as follows : 

"That the United States of America, in consideration of the premises and in execu- 
tion of the agreement and stipulation in the aforesaid treaty, have given and granted 
and by these presents do give and grant imto the said Choctaw Nation the aforesaid 
'tract of country west of the Mississippi' to have and to hold the same, with all the 
rights, privileges, immunities, and appurtenances of whatsoever nature thereunto 
belonging, as intended 'to be conveyed' by the aforesaid article, 'in fee simple to 
them and their descendants, to inure them, while they shall exist as a nation and 
live on it,' liable to no transfer or alienations, except to the United States or with 
their consent." 

Article 14 of the Choctaw treaty of 1830 (7 Stat. L., 335) gave the adult Choctaws 
who remained in Mississippi 640 acres of land, children over 10 years of age 320 acres, 
and children under 10 years of age 160 acres. They were made citizens of the United 
States and of the State of Mississippi. All could have accepted land and some did. 
They were recognized as citizens of the State under the laws of ]\Iississii)pi. About 
15,000 moved west under the treaty of 1830 and 4,180 remained. They could easily 
be identified up to 1842. Between 1838 and 1855, 3,400 moved .to the Choctaw Nation 
and became members of the tribe. Congress later provided for a payment to those 
Mississippi Choctaws who remained behind, and 3,585 received scrip, entitling them 
to locate upon public lands in the States of Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Missis- 
sippi. This scrip was transferable and in lieu of the second half of the scrip. Congress 
appropriated and paid these Mississippi Choctaws $872,000, conditioned upon their 
first removing to the Choctaw Nation in the Indian Territory. When they removed, 
they could have remained there and have been identified as citizens of the Choctaw 
Nation; but with their removal from the Choctaw Nation they abandoned their citi- 
zenship, disconnected themselves from their tribe, and were no longer members of 
the tribe, and have no legal claim whatever to being enrolled as members of the tribe. 

The Choctaw Nation has dealt generously with these people, and up to the time when 
the lands were finally allotted, they voluntarily admitted all Indians of Choctaw 
blood as members of the tribe; but Congress insisted upon a termination of their 
tribal government and the allotment of their lands and a final settlement of their 
affairs. This could not be done without first settling the question as to who should 
be enrolled as members of the tribe. 

The act of June 28, 1898 (30 Stat.. 495), section 21, empowered the Secretary of the 
Interior to make a final roll of the citizens of the Five Civilized Tribes', and another 
provision of this same section specifically authorized the commission to make a roll 
of those Mississippi Choctaws entitled to citizenship under tlie fourteentli article of 
the treaty of 1830. 

A provision in the Indian appropriation bill approved May 31, 1900, provided for 
the enrollment of the Mississippi Choctaws if they made bona fide settlement in the 
Choctaw Nation prior to the final approval of the rolls. 

Section 41 of the supplemental agreement with the Choctaws and Chickasaws 
approved July 1, 1902 (32 Stat., 641), provided for the enrollment of the Mississippi 
Choctaws at any time within six months after their identification as Mississippi 
Choctaws by making bona fide settlement witliin one year in the Choctaw Nation. 

Section 21 of the act of June 28, 1898 (30 Stat., 495) .contained a provision making 
the rolls final when approved by the Secretary of the Interior, as follows: 

"Tlie rolls so made, when approved by the Secretary of the Interior, shall be final, 
and the persons whose names are found thereon, with tlieir descendants thereafter 
born to them, with such persons as may intermarry according to tribal laws, shall alone 
constitute the several tribes whidi tliey represent." 

The Indian a])pnipriation bill approved March 3, 1901 (31 Stat., 1077), contained a 
])rovi~ion making the rolls of the Dawes Commission of the Five Civilized Tribes final 
when a])proved by the Secretary of the Interior, as follows: 

"The rolls made by the Cominis,-ion to the Five Civilized Tribes, when a])proved 
by the Secretary of the Interior, shall be final, and the persons whose names are found 
thereon shall alone constitute the several tribes which thev represent. 

Section 2 of the act of April 26, 1 906 (34 Stat . , 1 38 ). provided that the rolls of the tri be 
affected by this act .-hall be fully coiuj^lei; d on or before the 4th day of March, 1907, 



INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL, 1!)17. 165 

and the Secretary of the Interior shall ha\ e no jurisdiction to approve the enrollment 
of any person after said date, as follows: 

''Provided, That the rolls of the tribes affected by this act shall be fully completed 
on or before the fcuirth day of March, nineteen hundred and seven, and the Secretary 
of the Interior shall have no jurisdiction to approve the enrollment of any person after . 
said date." 

It will be seen that the first Choctaw agreement was made in 1897, and ratified by an 
act of Congress approved June 28, 1898, and that the enrollment proceeded from that 
time in 1898, until March 4, 1907, or a period of about nine years, and that provision 
was made for the identification and enrollment of such Mississippi Choctaws who chose 
to remove and permanently locate and become citizens of the Choctaw Nation, later 
to be admitted as a part of the State of Oklahoma. Such Indians as availed them- 
.selves of these provisions were enrolled. Those remaining in Mississippi were not 
enrolled. 

Now, those opposing this provision providing for a partial distribution of this money 
are attempting to assert that the Mississippi Choctaws and their descendants in the 
State of Mississippi are entitled to enrollment as members of the Choctaw Tribe and to 
participate in the distribution of the money. Their contention is not tenable. Every 
court, commission, secretary, or committee investigating this question has decided 
against them. 

1. The Supreme Court in the Eastern Cherokee case (117 U. S. 288) held that the 
North Carolina Cherokees could not live apart from their tribe and share in the benefits 
of the funds and common property of the tribe. The court, after reviewing the treaties 
relating to the same, concluded by saying: 

■"If Indians in that State (North Carolina) or in any other State east of the Mississippi 
wish to enjoy the benefits of the common property of the Cherokee Nation in whatever 
form it may exist they must, as held by the Court of Claims, comply with the consti- 
tution and laws of the Cherokee Nation and be readmitted to citizenship as there 
provided. They can not Live out of its territory, evade the obligations and burdens 
of citizenship, and at the same time enjoy the benefits of the funds and common 
property of the nation. Those funds and that property were dedicated by the con- 
stitution of the Cherokees and were intended by the treaties with the United States 
for the benefit of the united nation and not in any respect for those who had separated 
from it and become aliens to their nation. We can see no just ground on which the 
claim of the petitioners can rest in either of the funds held by the United States in 
trust for the Cherokee Nation." 

2. The Dawes Commission in the Jack Amos case held that the Choctaws residing in 
Mississippi were not entitled to enrollment without removal to the Choctaw Nation as 
follows: 

"This historical review of the acquisition of this territory by the Choctaw Nation 
and its subsequent legal relations to it makes it clear, in the ojjinion of this commission, 
that the Mississippi Choctaws are not under their treaties entitled to all rights of 
Choctaw citizenship except an interest in the Choctaw annuities and still continue 
their residence and citizenship in Mississippi." (H. Doc. 274, 55th Cong., 2d sess.) 

3. The Federal Court, through Judge Clayton, affirmed the decision of the Dawes 
Commission in the Jack Amos case and held that the Mississippi Choctaws residing out 
of the tribe were not entitled to be enrolled: 

"In the third article of the treaty the (Jhoctaws agreed to move all of their people 
within three years, and the United States intended that they should go. But by 
the fourteenth article of the treaty provisions were made whereby those who should 
decide to remain and become citizens of the State of Mississippi in the event that, 
because of the intolerance and persecutions of the whites which they themselves had 
so bitterly experienced, or for any other clause, they might become di.^satisHed with 
their altered conditions and their new citizenship and desire to follow them to their 
new homes, and thereafter exercise with them in their own country the privileges of 
citizenship, they could do so except that they were not to parti( ipate with them in 
their annuities, the lands which they were to receive in Mississippi being deemed a 
compen.satifjn for that. 

" » hen iho fourteenth article of the treaty was framed the negotiating parties 
understood that the policy of the United States was that the Choctaws were to be 
removed. The Choctaws, in artick> 3, had ju.'^t agreed that they .'-hiMild all go. The 
ink wa*" not vet dry in article 2, wherel)y Ihe condition was placed in this grant to the 
lands that they were to live up')n or they hhould be forfeited, and that no J)li^•ilege 
of citizen.ship could hi' conferred or enjoyed f)ut>.i(h^ of the territorial jurisdiction of 
their newly located nati'in. I'luleTstanding tlu-.^e (Mi'iditi</ns. the latter clause of 
article I I was penned; 



166 INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL^ 1917. 

" ' Persons who claim under this article shall not lose the privilege of a Choctaw citizen, 
but if they ever remove — that is, if they ever place themselves on the land and within 
the jurisdiction of the nation whereby those privileges may become operative — are not 
to be entitled to any portion of the Choctaw annuity.' 

• " In other words, if they ever remove, they are to enjoy all of the privileges of a Choc- 
taw citizen except that of participating in their annuities. If this be not the meaning 
to be attached to the word 'remove ' as used in the clause of the treaty under considera- 
tion , it must be meaningless. But in the interpretation of statutes it is the duty of the 
court to so interpret them as to give to every word a meaning, and in doing so it must 
take into consideration the whole statute, its objects and purposes, the rights which are 
intended to be enforced , and the evils intended to be remedied ; it may go to the history 
of the transaction about which the legislation is had and call to its aid all legitimate 
facts proven or of which the courts will take judicial notice in order to find the true 
meaning of the word as used in the statute. Of course, the same rule of interpretation 
applies to treaties. Adopting these rules in the inlerpietation of article 14 of the treaty 
of 1830, I arrive at the conclusion that the 'piivilcge of a Choctaw citizen' therein 
reserved to those Choctaws who shall remain, thereby separating themselves, it may be 
forever, from their brethren and their Nation, becoming citizens of another sovereignty 
and aliens of their own, situated so that it would be impossible, while in Mississippi, 
to receive or enjoy any of the rights of Choctaw citizenship, was the right to renounce 
his allegiance to the Commonwealth of Mississippi, move upon the lands conveyed to 
him and his people, and there, the only spot on earth where he could do so, lenew his 
relations with his people and enjoy all of the privileges of a Choctaw citizen except to 
participate in the annuities. 

"As an evidence that the Choctaw people themselves took this view of the question 
attention is called to the fact that their council has passed many acts and resolutions 
inviting these absent Choctaws to move into their country, and on one occasion ap- 
propriated a considerable sum of money to assist them on their journey; and, until 
the past two or three years, have always promptly placed those who did return on the 
rolls of citizenship, but never enrolled an absent Choctaw as a citizen." (Cong. Rec, 
Jan. 8, 1915, vol. 52; pt. 2, pp. 1242-1245.) 

4. An appeal was perfected to the Supreme Court of the United States and dis- 
missed by the appellants. (190 U. S., 873.) 

5. Congress by section 2 of the act of April 26, 1906 (34 Stat., 137), with all the 
information before it, ordered the rolls closed . 

6. Secretary Ballinger on February 12, 1910, opposed the reopening of the rolls. 
Writing the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, he said: 

"In conclusion, I am constrained to believe, and therefore recommend, that the 
rolls be not opened up, but that proper legal authority be given the Secretary of the 
Interior to place upon the rolls those Indians (about 52 in number) whose appli- 
cations were approved by the Commissioner to the Five Civilized Tribes and were 
transmitted to Washington before the 4th of March, 1907, but did not reach the depart- 
ment until after the rolls were closed; and, furthermore, that proper authority be 
given the Secretary of the Interior to examine and place upon the rolls the minor 
orphan children, incompetents, and Indians in incarceration whose claims were not 
presented in due time for adjudication. I am informed that this class numbers about 
200. No one seems to have taken the responsibility of presenting the claims of this 
class for consideration. They could not look after their own interests." (See S. Doc. 
No. 1139, 62d Cong., 3d sess.) 

7. Assistant Secretary Samuel Adams on July 2, 1912, reported against the enroll- 
ment of the Mississippi Choctaws. After revie"wing their case at length, he stated: 
"In fact, it may be urged by the tribes that responsibility, if any, rested upon the 
United States instead," and concluded as follows: "In view of the fact stated above, 
I am of the opinion that the bill (referring to the Harrison bill to enroll the Mississippi 
Choctaws) should not be enacted into law." 

8. The report of the subcommittee of the Indian Committee on January 2, 1915, 
reported against the reopening of the rolls in a lenghty report. (Report on H. R. 
12586; Cong. Rec, Jan. 8, 1915. vol. 52, pt. 2, p. 1247.) 

9. Senator Williams, on June 19, 1914, admitted on the floor of the Senate that the 
Mississippi Choctaws had no legal right to enrollment. On Ibis date he said, as shown 
on page 10710 of the Congressional Record: 

"I am not contending here that the Mississippi Choctaws, in the face of all that 
legislation and in the face of these decisions, have any right here that is enforceable 
in a court of law, but I am trying to get the legislative branch of this Government 
to change that law which was enacted against them and construed against them." 

Continuing, Senator Williams says: 

"So far as the construction of the court was concerned, I hardly see how the Supreme 
Court could ha^•e come to any other conclusion. * * * I am not talking now, 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL^ 1917. 167 

however — and I can not be thrown off the right scent — about what are tlieir rights in 
court to-day. I am talking about what their rights ought to be." 

10. The present Secretary of the Interior, Hon. Franklin K. Lane, reported Jan- 
uary 8, 1915, against the reoponing of the rolls and reviewed this entire question at 
length, concluding in the following language: 

"In view of the facts as presented to me, I am of the opinion that no legislation 
should be enacted for the reopaning of the rolls of the Choctaw Nation for the benefit 
of the Mississippi Choctaw claimants." (Cong. Rec, vol. 52, pt. 2, p. 1246.) 

11. Congress, by a provision in the Indian appropriation bill last year, 1915, after 
extended hearings before the committee and after extended debate upon the floor of 
the House, pro\dded for a pirtial distribution of this money in language similar to 
the provision in this bill. 

12. The present Assistant Commissioner of Indian Affairs, before the House Indian 
Committee (hearings on the Indian appropriation bill, pp. 336, 337), recommended 
he provision providing for a par capita payment to the Choctaws and Chickasaws. 

Thus you will see that the Choctaw people are asking not for 
money from the Government, but to have their own money paid them. 
Certainly this is a reasonable request. The Government promised it 
to them" It is theirs. They are in very great need of it. Many of 
them have long ago gone to their reward. Others are old and de- 
crepit and diseased. Congress should do justice to them and give, 
them this money. 

Now, every person making an argument before the Indian Com- 
mittee and before Congress in favor of the enrollment of the Missis- 
sippi Choctaws, makes it admitting that the Mississippi Choctaws 
have no legal rights, makes it admitting that they did not remove 
to the Choctaw Nation, and makes it admitting that they are resi- 
dents of the State of Mississippi, are citizens of that State, and of 
the United States. 

Everyone must admit that the Choctaw Nation has been more 
than generous with them, and all must admit that all the Choctaws 
who removed to the Choctaw Nation and became bona fide settlers 
there before the rolls were closed and remained there, were enrolled. 

Everyone making an argument in tlieir behalf, makes it admitting 
that their enrollment was provided for by section 21 of the act of 
June 28, 1898, and provided for by the act of May 31, 1900, condi- 
tioned only upon their removing to the Choctaw Nation and per- 
manently locating there, and provided for by the act of July 1, 1902, 
similarly concHtioned. 

Surely the Indian Committee will not longer delay the final settle- 
ment of Choctaw tribal affairs. It has now been too long delayed. 
This money should not oidy be paid, but Congress should at once 
provide for the disposition of the coal lands and other tribal property 
belonging to the Choctaw and Chickasaw people, and all their money 
should })e prorated among them. 

It is generally known, and it appears in the records, that a great 
lobby has been organized to secure the enrollment of the Mississippi 
Choctaws and that contracts have been secured aggregating millions 
of dollars. Interested attorneys have made all sorts of speeches and 
arguments looking to a delay in the nayjncnt of the Choctaw money 
and urging the reopening of the rolls. Surely Congress will follow 
the decisions of the courts, the Dawes Connnission, the Secretaries 
of the Interior, and the Committees of Congress who have given ex- 
tensive hearings to this micstion, rather than the j^leachngs of inter- 
ested attorneys who will be enriched by the reopening of the rolls. 

Almost 19 years have elapsed since the first Choctaw agreement was 
entered into in 1897. If the question of citizenship is again reopened, 



168 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BIIJ,, 1017. 

a settlement of it will not l)e reached within the next quarter of a 
century. 

As a final word, I beg the Members of Congress to at least give a 
small measure of justice to the Choctaw and Chickasaw people and 
provide for a partial distribution of their funds now. 

Mr. HaiTison based his argument for the enrollment of the Missis- 
si})pi Choctaws upon four grounds : 

First, Upon the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830; and it 
has been shown that the Dawes Commission and the United States 
Court in the Jack Amos case decided against his construction of this 
article. 

Second. He states that Senator Owen while attorney for the 
Mississippi Choctaws insisted that they sliould be enrolled. We 
have shown that Senator Owen in extended hearings before the 
Senate Indian Committee (pp. 74-108, 645-66]) stated that great 
generosity has been shown tlie Mississippi Choctaws and that the 
rolls should now be closed, giving his reasons in detail why the}'' 
should not be reopened. In other words, he makes the opposite 
contention to that of Mr. Harrison. 

Third. He contends tliat tlie Eastern Cherokee case, reported in 
202 U. S. 101, supports his contention. An examination of that 
case shows it does not support Mr. Harrison's argument, and that it 
was not a suit over the lands of the Cherokees west, or the proceeds 
thereof, nor for a division of their trust funds. On the other hand, 
the Cherokee case reported in 117 U. vS. 288 is a case in line and is 
against the contention of Mr. Harrison. 

Fourtli. He states that Judge Townsend in an ex parte decision 
held that the Mississippi Choctaws were entitled to be enrolled with- 
out removing to the Indian Territory, now Oklalioma. This was 
when tlie Choctaw Nation was not represented, and later, in the case 
of Ikard v. Minter, which was affirmed by the Indian Territory Court 
of Appeals in an opinion '\\Titten by Judge GiU (4 Ind. T. Repts., 214), 
after a full hearing and after the matter had been argued and briefed 
on both sides, Judge Townsend held that the Mississippi Choctaws 
were not entitled to be enrolled. Hence, it will be seen that the law 
is against Mr. Harrison, the decision of every court is against him, 
and the report of every committee of Congress is against him, as 
well as the report of every Secretary of the Interior. 

Now, gentlemen of the committee, the records of the Indian Office 
show there is to the credit of the Choctaw^ tribal funds in round num- 
bers about $9,000,000; that added to their unsold property, which 
when converted into casli will approximate something like 
$31,000,000. 

The Chairman. What does that consist of? 

Mr. Hastings. It consists of unsold tribal lands and coal lands in 
the Choctaw Nation, which added to th(> moneys which they have 
in the Treasury to the cre(Ht of the tribe will make this amount. 

The Chairman. They are deriving quite a royalty from the sale of 
coal, are they not? 

Mr. Hastings. They are deriving an annual royalty now u})on the 
sale of coal. 

Mr. Snyder. About how much? 

Mr. Hastings. I tliink a])out $250,000. But I may be mistaken 
as to the amoinit. 



INDIAN" APPROPRIATION BILL, 1917. 169 

There are on the Choctaw tribal rolls 20,799 persons, and upon the 
Chickasaw tribal rolls 6,304. Now, you will notice that this amend- 
ment provides payments of S200 to the Choctaws and $100 to the 
Chickasaws. The reason of this is that a year or more ago you pro- 
vided for a per capita payment of $100 to the Chickasaws, and this 
difference is in order to even them up, as those tribes have an equal 
undivided interest in and to the land and funds, the two tribes being 
separated only for political purposes. 

Now, gentlemen, I can not go into this case like I would like to, 
but a great many people do not understand the question of citizen- 
ship. I might say I represented the Cherokee Tribe for 20 years in 
citizenship matters, and I feel therefore some familiarity with it. It 
takes three things to constitute citizenship in one of those tribes, and 
they are the same in each. I want to correct an erroneous impression 
on this question. Nearly every Member of Congress, nearly every 
lawyer outside of Oklahoma, thinks it is a question of inheritance. 
That is a mistake. You must have three things to constitute citizen- 
ship in one of the Five Tribes. First, you must be an Indian by blood ; 
second, you must be a member of the tribe; and, third, you must be 
a resident of the tribe. Now, that has been decided by every court 
and every commission that has ever passed upon this question. 
Prior to June 10, 1896, the tribes passed upon their own questions 
of citizenship, but Congress, by the act of June 10, 1896, took that 
jurisdiction away and gave it to the Dawes Commission. Now, let 
me remind you, gentlemen of the committee, at that time we were 
in no State. We were political orphans in the Five Civilized Tribes. 
Th« Dawes Commission was not sent there to render a decision in our 
favor or against us. but it was sent there to render a fair and equitable 
decision, and to fairly and equitably administer affairs; and, gentle- 
men of the committee, certain members of the Dawes Commission 
were great lawyers, splendid lawyers, men who had paid special at- 
tention to these questions and thoroughly understood the purpose of 
this act of June 10, 1896, and thousands upon thousands of people 
applied for citizensliip in the Five Civilized Tribes, and thos(^ citizen- 
ship questions have all been settled. I might say that in the Cherokee 
Tribe there were 50,000 peoj)le claiming to be entitled to enrollment 
as citizens in tliat tribe, and only 2S3 iinhvichnds were admitted; so 
you can see tlie vast amount of fraud that attends tliis matter of ap- 
plying for citizenship in those tri])es. 

The Dawes Commission was created by the act of March 3, 1893. 
The first citizenship jurisdiction as above stated was given them 
by the act of June 10. 1896; additional jurisdiction was given them 
under the act of June 7, 1897; a(hiitional jiu'isdiction was given 
them under the act of June 28, 1898, under the act of May 31, 1900, 
and under the supplemental agreement of July 1, 1902. 

As has been stated by Mr. Ferris, every unbiased tribunal tliat has 
passed upon this (question has (U'cifUnl adversely to the contention of 
the Mississippi Choctaws. In other words, the Supreme Court of the 
United States in the Cherokee case reported in 117 U. S., 288, decided 
against them, holchng that the Cherokee In(Hans who resided in North 
Carolina and had not removed to the Cherokee Nation should not 
be enrolled as members of the Cherok(>e Nation west, and were not 
entitled to participate in the distribution of their trust funds. Mr. 



170 INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL^ 1917. 

Harrison calls attention to what is known as the eastern Cherokee 
case (202 U. S., 101). Gentlemen, that case does not decide what 
Mr. Harrison claims for it. I have not time to analyze it, but it does 
not go into the question of citizenship west. It does not go into the 
question of the right to the Cherokee lands west; it does not go into 
the question of the Cherokee trust funds west, but the Cherokee case 
reported in 117 U. S. did go into that one question. The eastern 
Cherokee case in 202 is a decision on what the Government of the 
United States owed the Cherokees under the treaty of 1835, made in 
Georgia with the Cherokees and not paid to them at that time, and 
had nothing whatever to do with the Cherokees west; it has nothing 
to do with their lands or the proceeds of the lands of tribal funds. 
It was for a balance due under the treaty of 1835. The question of 
residence of citizenship was not involved. 

The only other question that I have got time to answer was what 
Mr. Harrison said about Senator Owen. It is true that Senator Owen 
for a long time was representing the Mississippi Choctaws. He was 
their attorney. He made numerous arguments and filed many briefs 
before the courts and committees; and let me say, he frankly admits 
every court disagreed with him, every commission disagreed with 
him, every Secretary of the Interior disagreed with him, every 
authority before whom he went disagreed with him and held to the 
contrary, and Senator Owen himself, I want to say in justice to him, 
has stated this a number of times before the Senate Committee on 
Indian Affairs and on the floor of the Senate. He said: 

I was the attorney of the Mississippi Choctaws who were enrolled by the Choctaw- 
Chickasaw agreement of 1902. I represented them from 1896 to 1906 and devoted my 
time to their interests for 10 years. 

Now, here is what I wanted to call your particular attention to : 

No Choctaw in Mississippi or elsewhere not on the approved rolls of March 4, 1907, 
has any legal or equitable right to enrollment or to any further hearing. 

Mr. Norton. Wliere is that statement made ? What is the date in 
the Senate 'I 

Mr. Hastings. I will look it up and give it to you. I took it from 
a speech of Hon. W. H. Murray, Member of Congress, in the House on 
April 24, 1914. 

The Chairman. Without objection you may insert that at this 
point if you desire. 

Note. — Senator Owen, before the Senate Committee on Indian Affairs, on. January 
18, 1915, pages 74 to 108 of the printed hearings, and on February 5, 1915, pages 645 to 
661 of the hearings, stated at great length why he thought the Mississippi Choctaws 
should not be enrolled. 

Mr. Hastings. I am sorry I have not any more time, but the 
question has been thoroughly covered. I have a lar^e number of 
authorities that I will insert in the record with the permission already 
granted by the committee. 



X 



Part Twelve 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 305 

Mr. Meritt. That is correct. 
The amendment was agreed to. 

ASSEMBLY HALL AND GYMNASIUISr. 

Senator Catron. The next item is an appropriation of $25,000 
for assembly hall and gymnasium. Last j^ear I made a request for 
that. It was given to the school at Albuquerque, but was not given 
ours, because it seemed they wanted to apportion this appropriation 
so that it would not all come at once, and I was assured we would 
have that the next time. The amount of that is $25,000 for the 
assembly hall and gymnasium. I have spoken to Mr. Meritt about 
that, and he has stated that he would be here to give it his indorse- 
ment. Is that not correct, Mr. Meritt ? 

Mr. Meritt. Yes, sir. Mr. Chairman, we need the assembly hall 
and gymnasium for that school. We did not include it in our esti- 
mates for the reason that we wanted to keep the total amount at 
the lowest point possible. If the committee will give us the appro- 
priation for this building it can be lised to advantage. 

Senator Catron. I want to say one word about that. The Santa 
Fe location is a better location, a good deal, than the Albuquerque 
location, for health. These Indians, when they are brought from 
their Indian homes and put ihto these schools, seem to be afflicted 
more or less with an inclination to become consumptives or some- 
thing of that kind. When they are taken from outdoor exercise and 
outdoor environment and j^ut into these houses they seem not to be 
able to stand it. A great many i of them are afflicted in that way with 
some disease or other. Now. av^ want this hall and gymnasium, not 
in order to help them in/ that rei^ard, but because it will be a benefit 
to the institution. You have given it to Albuquerque and there is 
no reason why it shouj/d not be given here, because the same reasons 
that caused it to be giX-en there prevail here. 

The Chairman. You live in this city, do you not? That is your 
home city? / 1 

Senator Catron/ Yes, sir. \ 

The Chairman* And have they no assembly hall there? 

Senator Catrc^n. None at all. 

Senator GrOj^na. I move that it be allowed. 

Senator Paqe. Allow what? 

Senator Grdnna. $25,000 addititoal. 

Senator Page. You already have, $8,350 in addition to the $67,150. 
Is that right, Mr. Meritt ? \ 

Mr. Meritt. Yes, sir. \ 

The Chairman. Since you live \there and have such intimate 
knowledge with the situation, we wlt>uld like j'ou to assist the coifi- 
mittce on the floor. \ 

Senator Catron. I shall be very gl^d to do that. 

The Chairman. Is there anything blse you desire to submit, Sen- 
ator Catron? 1 

Senator Catron. That is all I desire, and I thank the committee 
very much. 

The amendment was agreed to. 

31362—16 20 



306 INDIAN APPROPKIATIOX BILL. 

CHOCTAW AXD CTIICKASAAV PEU CAPITA DISTRIBUTIOX. 

STATEMENT OF P. J. HURLEY, ESQ., NATIONAL ATTORNEY, 
CHOCTAW NATION. 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I was 
rather astonished that Mr. Ballinger, after having requested a hear- 
ing on this matter before the House committee, where the matter 
could be considered at length, has attempted to put it before this com- 
mittee in a very few minutes. I am not surprised at Mr. Ballinger's 
attitude toward me nor do I feel inclined to answer any of his per- 
sonal references. The fact is that all those who are attempting 
to secure money or other things of value from the Choctaw Nation 
are inclined to criticize me. Especially is this true if their attempts 
are of a fraudulent nature. 

During last summer Mr. Ballinger served upon me. through the 
United States mail, 4J: petitions in citizenship cases. These petitions 
contained the names of 250 applicants for enrollment as citizens, by 
blood, of the Choctaw Nation. These applicants are not Indians. 
They are negroes. They do not reside in the Choctaw Nation. The 
great majority of them had never made application for enrollment in 
the Choctaw Nation until they were approached by the agents and 
runners of Mr. Ballinger and his associates. During my investiga- 
tion of these cases I developed the facts stated in the Bowie report in 
so far as those facts pertained to Choctaw cases. Mr. Ballinger's 
statement to the effect that I wrote that report is untrue. I did not 
see the report until a copy was given to me. As evidence I did not 
write the report, I call attention to the fact it does not pertain en- 
tirely to Choctaw cases. The report rendered by Mr. Bowie covers 
Mr. Ballinger's operations in Creek, Cherokee, Seminole, and Chicka- 
saw cases. I represent only the Choctaw Nation. 

Mr. Ballinger's attempt to have the committee understand that I 
am guilty of some kind of unethical conduct as a lawyer is merely an 
attempt upon his part to besmirch my reputation in order to divert 
attention from his own questionable conchict. In the matter that Mr. 
Ballinger referred to I did represent 35 applicants for enrollment 
as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. I represented these persons before 
I became attorney for the Choctaw Nation. This matter Avas referred 
to before this committee some three years ago when I appeared here 
in opposition to the payment of some $3,500,000 of Choctaw money 
on contracts that were held by an attorney who claimed to be repre- 
senting the Choctaws in matters pertaining to the sale of their tribal 
estate. The matter M'as entirely disposed of in my favor at that time, 
and I would not consider it again were it not for the fact that there 
are some Senators now here who were not present them. It was 
charged that I had represented claimants for citizenship in the Choc- 
taw Nation before I became the attorney for the Choctaw Nation, 
and it was intimated that I still represented them while attorney for 
the Choctaw Nation. This charge was shown to be false, ancl Mr. 
Ballinger was present at that time. It is true that before I became 
attorney for the Choctaw Nation I did represent 35 claimants to 
citizenship out of 60,000 persons who were claimants for citizenship. 
Thirty-five persons out of 60,000 persons is not a very large per- 



INDIAX APPEOPKIATION BILL. 307 

centage. There is not another case in the 60,000 that is similar to 
the case of the family of 35 that I represented. I find nothing in the 
fact that I once represented these 35 claimants that would disqualify 
me in representing the nation against all other claimants. No one 
else except those Avhom I am preventing from defrauding the Choc- 
taws consider me disqualified. Mr. Ballinger stated to you that after 
I had been employed to represent claimants for citizenship I sought 
and obtained the attorneyship for the Choctaw Nation. The fact is 
that I did not seek the attorneyship for the Choctaw Nation. I was 
invited to take that position by the principal chief of the Choctaw 
Nation. The principal chief is present and will no doubt testif}^ upon 
that point if called upon to do so. 

The appointment of a tribal attorney is subject to the approval 
of the President of the United States. After having been appointed 
by the principal chief of the Choctaw Nation and before the presenta- 
tion of my contract to the President for approval, I wrote a letter to 
the President of the United States and one to the Secretary of the 
Interior stating to them that I had theretofore represened 35 claim- 
ants for citizenship in the Choctaw Nation, and insisted that it be 
understood before the approval of my contract that if my contract 
should be approved, that out of deference to legal ethics I should 
not be required to appear against my former clients in behalf of the 
Choctaw Nation. Since my appointment I have not appeared either 
for or against my former clients. With these facts before the Presi- 
dent and the Secretary, my contract was approved. This all oc- 
curred during the administration of President Taft. With all these 
matters in the record, I have since been reappointed by President 
Wilson. I feel that it is unnecessary to assure those who know me 
that I have in all matters and at all times adhered strictly to the 
ethics of my profession. I am somewhat gratified that after five 
years of the service of the nature required in my present position, 
that those who desire to attack my integrity have been able to find 
nothing in my entire record that could be distorted into the form of 
adverse criticism, with the exception of the fact that I once repre- 
sented 35 claimants for citizenship in the Choctaw Nation. I re- 
tired from those cases, with the consent of my clients, upon my ap- 
pointment as attorney for the Choctaw Nation, and it might be said 
in passing that those are clean cases, and a clean argiuuent was 
presented for the enrollment of the claimants. The names of the 
claimants and my argument are matters of record in the proceedings 
of this committee, and I am not ashamed of the cases or the argu- 
ment that I presented in them. These cases were not like Mr. 
Ballinger's cases; there was no fraud in them: no false affidavits 
made by professional witnesses, as there is in ^Ir. Ballinger's cases. 
AAHiat I have stated in this matter is borne out by the record of the 
hearings before this committee in regard to the so-called McMurray 
contracts, and also by the records of the Interior Department. 

Let us return now to the subject under consideration. Forty-four 
petitions, containing the names of 250 applicants for citizenship in 
the Choctaw Nation were served upon me by Mr. Ballinger. Of 
these 44 cases, 33 are corroborated by the affidavits of Alec Nail, an 
old negro, and 20 cases are corroborated by the affidavits of Webster 
Burton, a negro. In some cases the affidavits of Burton and Nail 



308 INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL. 

appeared in corroboration of the same petition. These negroes are 
illiterate and sign by mark. They are used as professional witnesses 
by the firm of Ballinger, Lindley & Rodkey in citizenship matters 
which are being conducted by their office in Muskogee. That is the 

statement I made 

Mr. Ballinger. They never were there- 



Mr. Hurley. Wait a moment; I allowed you to finish without 
interruption. Now, gentlemen, for the purpose of this record I ask 
that there be inserted here the title of each case, the names of the 
witnesses who appeared, and the number of affidavits that they made. 

The Chairman. If there is no objection, that will be inserted. 

(The list referred to is here printed in full as follows:) 

LIST OF APPLICATIONS OF PERSONS FOK ENROLLMENT AS CITIZENS BY HLOOD OF THE 

CHOCTAW NATION. 

Case No. 2. In re application of James Goings for liimself and otliers for en- 
rollment as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants in- 
volved, six. Supported by affidavit of Alec Nail. 

Case No. 3. lu re application of Jackson Barrett for enrollment of himself 
and others as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants in- 
volved, eight. Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and W. M. James. 

Case No. 3B. In re petition of Mary Ross, nee Dunn, nee Fulsom, for enroll- 
ment of herself and child as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number 
of applicants involved, two. Supported by affidavits of W. M. James and Alec 
Nail. 

Note. — No petition bearing the numeral 4 was served upon me by Mr. Bal- 
linger. 

Case No. 5. In re application of John Harrison et al. for enrollment as citi- 
zens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants involved, 23. Sup- 
ported by affidavits of Alec Nail and his brother, Peter Nail. 

Case No. 5A. In re application of Emily Mills, nee Allen, for enrollment of 
herself and minor child as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of 
applicants involved, two. Supported by affidavit of Nelson Tolbert. 

Case No. 5B. In re application of Roxy Planegan for enrollment of herself 
as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. This applicant is a member of 
the John Harrison family, whose application appears under the numeral 5. No 
affidavit. 

Case No. 5C. In re application of Henry Logan King for enrollment of him- 
self and family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of appli- 
cants involved, two. Supported by affidavits of W. M. James, Alec Nail, and 
Daisy Jackson, also Ada Williams. 

Cases Nos. 6 and 6B. In re application of Melissa Marcy, n6e Carroll, n^e 
Birdsong, for enrollment of herself and family as citizens by blood of the Choc- 
law Nation. Number of applicants involved, seven. Supported by affidavits 
of Alec Nail and W. M. James. 

Case not numbered. In re application of Ruth D. Lister, n6e Robinson, for 
enrollment as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants 
involved, one. Supported by affidavit of Alexander Robinson. 

Note. — No petitions served under numerals 7 and 8. 

Case No. 9. In re application of Thomas F. Eubanks for enrollment of himself 
and others as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants 
involved, 16. Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and Johnson Gift. 

Note. — No application served under numeral 10. 

Case No. 11. In re application of Mattie Breedlove et al. for enrollment as 
citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applican)ts involved, five. 
Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and AVebster Burton. 

Case No. 12. In re application of Bertha Tolber for enrollment of herself and 
family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants in- 
volved not stated. Supported by affidavits of Henry Willard, or Woodward, and 
Dan Knoblin. 

Case No. 12A. In re application of Arthur W. Walton for enrollment of him- 
self and family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of ap- 
plicants involved, 10. Supported by affidavit of Alec Nail. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 309 

Case No. 12B. In re application of Lee Love for enrollment of himself and 
family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants in- 
volved, eight. Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and Webster Burton. 

Case No. 13. In re petition of Jurdeau Sniyers, for enrollment of herself 
and family as citizens by blood of tlie Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants 
involved, seven. Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and W. M. James. 

Note.— No application served under numeral 14. 

Case No. 15. In re application of Lizzie Campbell, nee Lenox, nee Brown, for 
enrollment of herself and son as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Num- 
ber of applicants involved, two. Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and 
Webster Burton. 

Case No. 16. In re application of John H. Duncan, in behalf of his children, 
the heirs of Pennsylvania Duncan, deceased, and for the enrollment of said 
Pennsylvania Duncan, as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of 
applicants involved, twelve. Supported by affidavits of Thompson Peters, Mar- 
tin Brown, and Ben Grayson. 

Case No. 16A. In re application of Alice Cole, for enrollment of herself 
as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants involved, 
one. Supported by affidavits of J. H. Barrett and Alec Nail. 

Case No. 17. In re application of Jane Driver for enrollment of herself and 
family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants in- 
volved, three. Supported by affidavits of Webster Burton and Alec Nail. 

Case No. 18. In re application of Mary Reaves, nee Hampton, et al., for en- 
rollment as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants in- 
volved, fourteen. Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and Webster Burton. 

Case No. 19. In re petition of p]mma .Tones, nee Ervin, for enrollment of her- 
self and child as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of appli- 
cants involved, two. Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and Webster Burton. 

Case No. 20. In re petition of Annie Abernathy, nee Frazier, for enrollment 
of herself as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants 
involved, one. Supported by affidavits of Webster Burton and Alec Nail. 

Note. — No application served under numeral 21. 

Case No. 22. In re application of John Adkins for enrollment of himself and 
family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants in- 
volved, six. Supported by affidavits of Webster Burton and Alec Nail. 

Case No. 23. In re application of Willis S. Taylor for enrollment of himself 
and family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of apjdicants 
involved, five. Supported by affidavits of Hannah IVIusgrove, Webster Burton, 
and Alec Nail. 

Note. — No application served under numeral 24. 

Ca.se No. 2.5. In re application of Thomas Goings for enrollment of himself 
as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants involved, 
one. Sui)ported by affidavits of Webster Burton and Alec Nail. 

Case No. 2.5A. In re application of Henrietta Iloberts, for enrollment of her- 
self and family, and in behalf of her sister, INIinnie Patterson, nee Bowman, 
and her family, as citizens I)y blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of appli- 
cants involved, thirtv-one. Supported bv affidavits of Webster Burton and Alec 
Nail. 

Case No. 26. In re application of Angle Flanagan, for eiu'ollment of herself 
as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants involved, 
one. Sui)ported by affidavits of W^ebster Burton and Alec Nail. 

NoTK. — No applications served under numerals 27 and 2S. 

Case No. 29. In re application of Elizabeth Sexton, nee Folsom, for enrollment 
of herself and her deceased minor child as citizens by blood of the Choctaw 
Nation. Number of applicants involved, two. Supported by affidavit of Charlie 
Willard. 

Case No. 30. In re application of John H. Lewis, for enrollment of himself 
and three children as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of 
applicants involved, four. Supported by affidavit of Nelson Tolbert. 

Case No. 31. In re application of Ida Lewis, nee Brifton, for enrollment of 
herself and child as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of appli- 
cants involved, two. Supported by affidavits of G. W. Wilson and Nelson 
Tolbert. 

Case No. 32. In re application of Tennessee Ricketts, n6e Davis, for enroll- 
ment of herself, her children and grandchildren as citizens by blood of the Choc- 
tow Nation. Number of applicants involved, 10. Supported by affidavit of 
Nelson Tolbert. 



310 INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL. 

Case No. 33. In re application of Jennie Wilson, n§e Ramsey, n6e Holloway, 
n^e .Johnson, for enrollment of herself and minor children as citizens by blood 
of the Choctaw Nation. Num])or of applicants involved, 9. Supported by affi- 
davits of Graham W. Wilson and William Davis. 

Note. — No applications served under the numerals 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 
41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, and 51. 

Case No. 52. In re application of Sallie Piles, nee Stewart, nge Johnson, for 
enrollment of herself and family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 
Number of Applicants involved, 3. Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and 
Webster Burton. 

Case No. 53. In re application of Charles A. Edwards, for enrollment of him- 
self and family as citizens l)y blood of the Choctaw Nations. Number of appli- 
cants involved, 3. Supported l)y affidavits of Alec Nail and Webster Burton. 

Note. — No ajiplication served under numeral 54. 

Case No. 55. In re application of Mary L. Harrington, for enrollment of her- 
self and family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of appli- 
cants involved, 4. Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and Webster Burton. 

Note. — No applications served under numerals 56 and 57. 

Case No. 58. In re application of Perry Walker, for enrollment of himself as 
a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants involved, 1. 
Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and James Goings. 

Note. — No application served under numeral 59. 

Case No. 60. In re application of John G. Williams, for enrollment of himself 
and family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants 
involved, 11. Supported by affidavits of Alec Nail and Webster Burton. 

Note. — No applications served under numerals 61, 62, and 63. 

Case No. 64. In re application of May Kilby, nee Bingham, for enrollment of 
herself as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants in- 
volved, 1. Supported by attidavits of Alec Nail and Webster Burton. 

Case No. 65. In re application of Viola Bullock, nee Dillard, for enrollment 
of herself as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. Number of applicants 
involved, 1. Supported by affidavits of Webster Burton, Alec Nail, and Thomas 
Goings. 

list of applications ok persons for ENUOLL.MENT as CHOCTAW freedmen. 

Case No. 1. In re application of Charles Harris, for enrollment of himself 
and family as Choctaw freedmen. Number of applicants involved, 3. No affi- 
davit. 

Note. — No applications served under numerals 2, 3, and 4. 

Case No. 5. In i-e application of Alec Nail for enrollment of his minor chikl, 
Newton Nail, as a Choctaw freedman. Number of applicants involved. 1. No 
affidavit. 

Case No. 5A. In re application of Edwards Perkins, for enrollment as a 
minor Choctaw Freedman. Number of applicants involved, 1. Supported by 
affidavit of Jannie Lockett. 

Note. — No applications served under numerals 6, 7. 8, 9, 10. 

Case No. 11. In re application of Henry Folsom for enrollment of himself 
and family as Choctaw freedmen. Number of applicants involved, 10. Sup- 
ported by affidavits of James Goings, Alec Nail, and Webster Burton. 

Case No. 12. In re application of Wiley G. Williams, for enrollment of him- 
self and family as Choctaw freedmen. Number of applicants involved, 8, Sup- 
ported by affidavits of Alec Nail and Webster Burton. 

Note. — No application served under numeral 13. 

Case No. 14. In i-e application of Sylvester Fisher, for enrollment of Freddie 
Carr, a minor, as a Clioctaw freedman. Number of applicants involved, 1. 
Supported by affidavits of Rosa Nail and Alec Nail. 

Total number of petitions. 45; total number of applicants, 250; number of 
affidavits made by Alec Nail. 33; number of affidavits made by Webster Burton. 
20 ; number of affidavits made by W. M. James, 5 ; number of affidavits made by 
Nelson Tolbert, 4. 

P. J. Hurley, 
National Attorney for the Choctatv Nation. 

Mr. Hurley. Mr. Ballinger made the statement during the course 
of his remarks that none of these negroes who served him and his 
associates as professional Avitnesses had been convicted of perjury. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 311 

There is a good reason for that. They are not guilty of perjury. 
They are guilty of false swearing. The affidavits submitted by Mr. 
Ballinger are not affidavits required under any statute; consequently 
they are merely false sAvearing, not perjury. There may be other 
charges upon Which these gentlemen and all connected with this 
propagancla may be prosecuted, but in my judgment it will not be 
on the charge of perjury. It may be that all connected with this 
matter are guilty of a conspiracy to defraud, and that they have 
used the United States mail in furtherance of that purpose. This, 
however, is not a matter of my concern. It is a matter for the 
district attorney. 

I am glad Mr. Ballinger has made it unnecessary for me to show 
his connection with this transaction. I have his letters, together 
with the envelopes in which he transmitted them through the United 
States mail, together with other evidence connecting him indissolubly 
with the firm of Ballinger, Lindley & Eodkey, of Muskogee, who 
conducted the cases which are here under consideration. The facts 
developed in my investigation this summer, which are corroborated 
by the records which I have here, are these : Mr. Ballinger rented 
an office in the Metropolitan Building at Muskogee, Okla. This is 
the building in which the offices of the superintendent to the Five 
Civilized Tribes are located. In this office Mr. Lindley, Mr. Bal- 
linger's partner, and a negro named Nelson Durant, an ex-convict, 
who posed as a lawyer, commenced operations in these citizenship 
cases. 

Mr. Ballinger. There was nothing of that kind 

The Chairman. Mr. Ballinger, you will have two or three minutes 
later for a rejoinder. Do not interrupt Mr. Hurley noAv. 

Mr. Hurley (continuing). Mr. Ballinger's men, Webster Burton, 
Alec Nail, Nelson Durant. and others, brought in negroes; applica- 
tions of those negroes for citizenship Avere made out by Nelson Du- 
rant and Mr. Lindley. These applications contained false and fraud- 
ulent statements as to the identity of the person making the applica- 
tion. The false and fraudulent statements contained in those ap- 
plications were corroborated by the affidavits of Alec Nail and 
Webster Burton, and other negroes of the same caliber as disinter- 
ested persons. As shoAvn by the testimony Avhich I ha\e here, Web- 
ster Burton and Alec Nail received from 75 cents to $2.50 for each 
affidavit that they made in corroboration of the facts that Avere 
stated in the petitions prepared by Lindley and Nelson Durant. 
These are the affidavits and petitions that Avere sent me by jSIr. 
Ballinger for investigation. After a thorough and complete investi- 
gation of these cases I fomid that there Avas not one person Avhose 
name a])peared in any one of the petitions Avho Avas legally, equitably, 
or morally entitled to citizenshi)) in the- Choctaw Nation. These 
persons do not reside in the ChoctaAv Nation. They have no ChoctaAv 
blood. 

Attention is iuAited to the fact that only a vei-y few of these ap- 
])licants made application or in any other manner attempted to pro- 
cure enrollment during the time that the rolls Avere being made. In 
their affidavits the attorneys have these applicants state that the 
reason that they did not make application Avas due to the fact that 
they belonged to the so-called Snake or Ketooyah faction of In- 
dians. This faction of Indians opposed the allotment of land in 



312 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

severalty. They adhered to the old tribal customs and insisted that 
the land should be continued to be held in common. This faction of 
Indians organized themselves in opposition to the enrollment and the 
allotment of lands in severalty. They were all full-blood Indians 
and lived largely in the remote and mountainous vicinities of the 
different tribes of the Five Civilized Tribes. When the attitude of 
the so-called Snake faction became known to the United States 
Government, the Government sent special agents into the remote 
districts to seek out the adherents of the Snake faction. As a result, 
they found every Indian Avho claimed to be a member of the Snake 
faction; they were arbitrarily enrolled and arbitrarily allotted, care 
being taken by the Government to select for them the best land avail- 
able. As a conseq-uence, the Snake Indians own more of the good 
land in Oklahoma than any other class of Indians. Mr. Ballinger 
and his associates seek, through the methods which I have described, 
to induce you gentlemen to believe that these negroes, who have been 
induced by Mr. Ballinger's associates to sign petitions, were Snake 
Indians. There is not one Indian among them. During all my in- 
vestigation I did not find one of them who could speak one word of 
the Choctaw language. The Snake Indians were full-bloods and 
spoke only the Indian language. These applicants can not speak a 
word of Choctaw, yet they claim to have belonged to the organiza- 
tion that opposed enrollment. A statement to the effect that these 
negroes are Snake Indians sounds rediculous in Oklahoma, where 
he attitude of the Snake Indians are known. These applicants, as 
shown by the addresses given in their petitions, live at Sapulpa, 
Tulsa, and Muskogee, the most populous towns in Oklahoma. These 
towns are not located in the Choctaw Nation. It would be unheard 
of to think of the Snake Indians coming down from their mountain 
homes to reside in these cities, yet Mr. Ballinger and his profes- 
sional witnesses would, if uninterrupted, be able to prove that this 
has been done. 

Let me refer specifically now to some of the cases. For instance, 
one applicant swears, and his sworn statement is corroborated by two 
professional witnesses, that the applicant is the daughter of Leonard 
Wright ; that Leonard Wright is a brother of x\llen Wright, who was 
principal chief of the Choctaw Nation. I have the petition here and 
would like to have you read it, as well as the affidivats of the two 
so-called disinterested parties. After reading it, you would have the 
impression that the statement is true and that this Indian had been 
deprived of her birthright. The investigation which I made further 
disclosed the fact that Allen Wright never had a brother; that he 
migrated from Mississippi in 1831 as an orphan boy 8 years of age. 
He had one sister. His sister gi'ew up and married in Indian Ter- 
ritory. She is the mother of Judge Allingiton, of Atoka. Judge 
Allen Wright, of the firm of Wright & Boyd, of McAlester, Okla., 
is a son of Chief Wright. Chief Wright never had a brother, yet 
according to the affidavits which I have here and the affidavits in 
corroboration thereof this negro is a niece of the principal chief 
of the Choctaw Nation and a first cousin to Judge Wright, of Mc- 
Alester. I submit, gentlemen, that that is a slander as well as an 
effort to obtain through fraud a right to participate in Choctaw 
property. In another case served upon me by Mr. Ballinger and his 
associates the applicant alleges that he is the son of Frances Hunter 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 313 

and Tolliver Barnette; that Frances Hunter was a sister of Thomas 
W. Hunter, who is famous among the Choctaws. Thomas W. Hun- 
ter made a race for the office of principal chief in 1902. There was 
a controversy over the election, and by force of arms the adherents 
of Hunter took possession of the Choctaw capital and held it against 
the Choctaw Nation for several days. It was finally taken from 
them by the United States troops. Thomas W. Hunter is now a 
member of the State Legislature of Oklahoma. He is a character 
who is well known in Oklahoma. This applicant claimed that he 
was a son of the sister of Thomas Hunter. 

Among other things, the petition contains a statement in i-egard 
to the Hunter family — shows the names of the father and grand- 
father, etc. I thought probably there might be something in the 
statement, as these applicants were not negroes; they looked more 
like white people ; so I sent the petition to Mr. Thomas W. Hunter, 
and I immediately commenced an investigation of the case. The 
investigation developed the fact that Thomas W. Hunter never had 
a sister named Frances Hunter. Further investigation showed that 
Thomas W. Hunter's father was not known by the name alleged in 
the petition; in fact, his name was not Hunter. Thomas W. Hun- 
ter's father was a full-blood Choctaw Indian and was known as 
Benahuntubby. The nearest the white people could get to pronounce 
the name was Bennehunta. This finally developed into the name 
of Bennie Hunter. When Tom Hunter was sent away to school he 
became known under the name of Thomas W. Hunter. This petition 
and the affidavits in corroboration thereof fixed Thomas W. Hunter 
and his family up with a line of ancestors and collateral kindred 
bearing English names, but aside from this part of the case the peti- 
tion and the affidavits show that the petitioner is the son of a woman 
'^vho never existed. 

Mr. Ballinger has made a long argument to show that Mr. Bowie 
does not legally hold the office of deputy clerk of the United States 
court for the eastern district of Oklahoma. He attacks the legality 
of the appointment of the officer before whom the witnesses swore 
rather than the testimony of the witnesses. I am not much concerned 
in regard to whether or not Mr. Bowie is a legally qualified and act- 
ing de jure or de facto clerk of the United States court for the eastern 
district of Oklahoma. I am interested only in the correctness of the 
facts which he has ascertained from the witnesses. Mr. Ballinger 
seems to be not in a position to deny the correctness of the testimony 
of his professional Avitnesses wherein they have repudiated the affi- 
davits which Mr. Ballinger and his associates procured from these 
witnesses and attached to false petitions which Mr. Ballinger served 
upon me through the United States mail. Mr. Ballinger's attack on 
Mr. Bowie is rather in the nature of an attack upon the manner of 
impaneling the jury than an attack upon the correctness of the facts 
found by the jury. I will not consider his argument in this matter 
further unless he is able to show that the conclusions reached by Mr. 
Bowie on the facts ascertained by him in his investigation are not 
correct. This I know Mr. Ballinger can not do. I am familiar with 
the facts stated in the Bowie report in so far as they pertain to 
Choctaw cases, and I know them to be correct. 

Now, gentlemen. I have not said anything disrespectful to Mr. 
Ballinger, nor do I intend to do so. His statements about the sur- 



314 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

1 eptitious manner in which I filed the Bowie report is incorrect. I 
did not fde that report. This is my first appearance in this matter, 
and tliis is the record of my investigation which I have here with 
me. I am read}' to submit it now. I do not feel that I am appearing 
before this committee secretly or that I am attempting to place any- 
thing before you in a surreptitious manner. 

jNIr. Ballinger stated to you that my reason for not coming boldly 
out with the statements contained in the Bowie report is due to the 
fact that I am afraid of prosecution at his hands. I do not feel that 
I should fear prosecution for stating the truth. It is a fact that 
every witness used by Mr. Ballinger has repudiated the affidavits 
made by him in corroboration of the affidavits filed by Mr. Ballinger. 
Every one of Mr. Ballinger's professional witnesses have impeached 
their own testimony. 

I have not attempted to disbar Mr. Ballinger. I have purposely 
refrained from making a statement of my opinion in regard to the 
professional ethics of his conduct. That is not a part of my duty. 
Neither is it my duty to prosecute Mr. Ballinger and his associates. 
1 do not know what will be done when this record comes to the atten- 
tion of the parties whose duty it is to prosecute those who violate 
the law. What I have said to this committee is for the purpose of 
enabling the committee to determine what its attitude shall be toward 
a man who is so loose in his practice as to allow a condition of this 
kind to develop. I am not responsible for the condition. I did not 
begin this matter in order to investigate Mr. Ballinger. Mr. Ballin- 
ger asked for the investigation, and the investigation which he asked 
for, but which he did not think would be made, developed the facts 
which I have submitted to you. When I went into these cases I 
fov;nd them so fraudulent and the attempt to secure enrollment of 
these persons so unjust and unconscionable that I could not do other- 
wise than complete the investigation. I have arrived at the conclu- 
sion, gentlemen, that Mr. Ballinger and his associates could not by 
the most astute fraud be able to secTire the enrollment of any of these 
applicants as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. Then why should 
they continue to take these applications? I will tell you. Nelson 
Durant, a negro ex-convict, who is always to be found in the outer 
office of the firm of Ballinger. lindley & Rodkey at Muskogee, col- 
lects fees from these api:)lic:uits. We have evidence here to show 
that through means of this go-between. Nelson Durant. and in some 
instances other negroes of questionable character, the applicants are 
each relieved of a fee ranging from $5 to $00. Then the propaganda 
is carried on, not for the purpose of enrolling these pers<ms, but for 
the purpose of separating ignorant and gullible negroes from what 
little money they have. The taking of fees from applicants for 
enrollment is in violation of the act of Congress of August 1, 1914. _ 

Besides obtnining fees from these negroes, Mr. Ballinger and his 
associates had another object in view in preparing these petitions and 
supporting them by affidavits. If I had not investigated these cases 
Mr. Ballinger would be here with his petitions in an attempt to show 
you gentlemen that these negroes are Indians who have been deprived 
of their birthrights, and would be asking you to further postpone the 
distribution of Choctaw funds until this claimant cases could be con- 



INDIAN APPKOPKIATION BILL. 315 

sidered. This is merely another step by those who have opposed a 
distribution of the Choctaw funds to defeat the provision authorizing 
a per capita payment to the Choctaws and Chickasaws which is car- 
ried in the present bilh 

Now, gentlemen, I have stated briefly our case. We have here the 
pictures of the men who served as runners, agents, and witnesses for 
Mr. Ballinger and his associates at their offices in Muskogee. These 
pictures give their names and their cell numbers and where they have 
served time in the penitentiary. I think it would be well to insert 
them in the record at this point. 

Senator Curtis. Those are all printed, are they not, in the House 
hearings ? 

Mr. Hurley, They are. 

The Chairman. The photographs all appear in the House hear- 
ings. It would take an order of the Senate to have them inserted in 
our record. 

Mr. Hurley. Then let me withdraw that request, if the committee 
has all the information it desires. I will ask the committee if it will 
be possible for me to have 8 or 10 cases inserted, and in order to be 
fair to Mr. Ballinger I will take those cases consecutively, so as to 
show that I have not picked out the worst cases; say, have 10 cases 
printed, to show that the facts I have stated are corroborated by the 
record which I have here. 

The Chairman. You refer 'to the 10 cases of people applying for 
enrollment as citizens? * 

Mr. Hurley. Yes, sir. 

Senator Owen. Which were served on you? 

Mr. Hurley. Which were served on me by Mr. Ballinger. 

Senator Oaven. I move that be done, Mr. Chairman. 

The Chairman. Very well; the 10 cases may be inserted in the 
record. 

(The 10 cases referred to are here printed in full as follows:) 

Case No. 1 Application of Ruth D. Lester. 

Note. — Tliis case was not numbered. I am sul)mitting it as No. 1, not be- 
cause it logically belongs in that place, but because special stress was hiid upon 
this case by ]\Ir. Ballinger. 

Case No. 2 Ap])lication of James Goings, et al. 

Case No. 3 Application of Jackson Barrett, et al. 

Case No. 3B Application of Mary Ross. 

No case was served upon me under the numeral 4. 

Case No. 5A Petition of Emily Mills, et al. 

Case No. 5 Application of John Harrison, et al. 

Case No. 6 and 6B Petition of Melissa Marcy, nee Carroll, et al. 

No cases were served upon me under the numerals 7 and 8. 
Case No. 9 Application of Thomas F. Eubanks, et al. 

" Note. — It should bo noted that while no cases were served under some 
numerals, a number of cases will be found to have been served under the same 
numeral. 

" No case was served under the numeral 10. 

The case of Mattie Breedlove was served under the numeral 11, but was 
served after the investigation of other cases in Oklnlioma had been comi)leted 
and after I had come to Washington, and consequently has not been fully in- 
vestigated. It might be stated in passing, however, that this application is 
also supported by the affidavits of Webster Burton and Alec Nail — the two 
negro witnesses so prevalently used by Mr. Ballinger and his associates in 



316 INDIAlSr APPROPRIATION BILL. 

corroboration of the false statements contained in tlie petitions wliicli were 
filed with me. 

•'Case No. 12 Application of Bertha Tolber, et al. 

^ Case No. 13 Petition of Jurdean Smyers, for enrollment of herself 

and others. 
" These cases are not chosen out of the 44 that were served upon me by 
Mr. Ballinger as containing the most conspicuous evidence of fraud and false 
swearing. They are taken in their numerical order. 

CASE NO. 1. 

Statement of P. J. Hukley, Attorney, fob the Choctaw Nation In Re : 
AppLiCATroN for the Enrollment of Ruth D. Lister, ni&e Robinson, as a 
Citizen by Blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

Before the Secretary of the Interior. 

i'etition of ruth d. lister (robinson), for enrollment as a member of the 
choctaw tribe of indians as a citizen by blood. 

To the Secretary of the Interior: 

Your petitioner, Ruth D. Lister, nee Robinson, respectfully petitions the honor- 
able Secretary of the Interior to investigate her case, and if the facts justify 
such I'ecommendation that Congress be requested by the honorable Secretary, 
the administrator of the Choctaw estate, to enroll her as a member of the 
Choctaw tribe as a citizen by blood ; and thereupon petitioner shows : 

That she is a daughter of William F. Robinson by his lawful wife, Emily F. 
Robinson n6e Bond, who were lawfully married June 15, 1882. That as a re- 
sult of said marriage petitioner was born .Tune 5, 1883, on Hull's Cow Ranch, 
Pickens County, Chickasaw Nation. That her father was a duly enrolled and 
recognized citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation at the time of his marriage 
and at all time since. That on the Sunday before Easter, 1884, he had trouble 
with a man by the name of Houston, injuring him, and believing he had 
killed him, left the Chickasaw Nation and was never heard of again until 
1904, and after the rolls were closed petitioner learned that her father was 
living in Texas, had remarried, and had a number of children by his second 
wife. That during the enrollment period petitioner was a minor, and had no 
knowledge that it was necessary for her to file an application to secure her 
enrollment, and had no one to look after her interests. That her father and 
all of his children by his second wife were enrolled by the act of August 1, 
1914, their names appearing in Senate Document No. 478, Sixty-third Congress, 
second session, as a result of an investigation and report made by W. C. 
Pollock, Esq., and set out in Senate Document No. 1139, Sixty-second Con- 
gress, third session, page 69. That her rights claim to enrollment is established 
by her affidavit hereto attached and the accompanying papers, and by the 
affidavit of her uncle Alexander Robinson, an enrolled member of the Choctaw 
Tribe, residing at Doyle, Okla. 

Wherefore, petitioner prays that her case be investigated, and that suitable 
steps be taken to obtain from Congress appropriate legislation for her enroll- 
ment and the payment to her of her equitable share of the property of the 
Choctaw Tribe. 

Respectfully submitted. 

Ruth D. Lister, 

By , 

Her Attorney. 



State of Tennessee, County of Blount, ss: 

Ruth D. Lister, being by me first duly sworn according to law, deposed and 
said: 

I am the daughter of William P. Robinson and Emily F. Robinson (nee 
Bond), who were married .Tune 15, 1882. I was born .Tune 5, 1883, my father 
and mother living at that time on Hull's Cow Ranch, Pickens County, Chicka- 
saw Nation. On the Sunday before Easter, 1884, on which day he had trouble 
with a man by the name of Houston, struck Houston and nearly killed him, 
and, believing Houston would die, left the country, and I have never seen him 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 317 

since. I never heard from him again until 1904, after tlae rolls were closed so 
far as the receipt of applications were concerned. Several years after the 
departure of my father my mother brought me to Tennessee, where I was 
living on June 28, 1898, being at that time a minor child. I had no knowledge 
that rolls were being made of the Chostaw Indians preparatory to the division 
of the tribal property, and did not learn of such fact until it was too late to 
make application. 

My father, William P. Robinson, together with his six children by his second 
wife, were enrolled pursuant to the act of August 1, 1914, his name and the 
names of his sis children by his second wife appearing in Senate Docu- 
ment No. 478, Sixty-third Congress, second session, the names of his children 
and my half brothers and sisters appearing therein, being as follows: Allice, 
Alpha, Adda B., James "William, Emeline, and Mary Ola Robinson. My father's 
case was investigated in 1910 by Judge W. C. Pollock, and the facts with 
reference to his right to enrollment as a Choctaw Indian and his flight from 
the Choctaw country in 1883 are set out in Mr. Pollock's report which was 
printed as a part of Senate Document No. 1139, Sixty-second Congress, third 
session, page 69. 

I did not know that my father was alive until in 1904, when I was so ad- 
vised by my grandmother and my uncle, Alexander Robinson, who lives at 
Doyle, Okla., and who is a brother of my father, and is an enrolled Choctaw 
Indian. I attach hereto the original letter of my grandmother, Mrs. E. E. 
Robinson, dated June 23, 1904, advising me that my father was alive and had 
five children. I also attach hereto an original letter written me under date of 
July 14, 1910, by my uncle, Alexander Robinson, of Doyle, Okla., advising me 
that he was doing all he could to secure my enrollment as a member of the 
Choctaw Tribe. 

On January 2.5, 1900, when I was 16 years of age, I married Robert F. 
Lister, with whom I am now living at Maryville, Tenn. 

Ruth D. Lister. 

Siibscribed and sworn to before me this 20th day of July. 1915. 

[seal.] R. R. Kramer, 

Notary Public, Blount County, Tenn. 



State of Oklahoma, County of Stephens, ss. 

Alexander Robinson, being by me first duly sworn according to law, depo.sed 
and said : 

I have carefully read the affidavit of Ruth D. Lister, nee Robinson, and have 
a personal knowledge of the facts therein stated, which are true of my own per- 
sonal knowledge. I am an enrolled Choctaw Indian ; am a brother of William P. 
Robinson, the father of Ruth D. Lister. Her father, William P. Robinson, is 
now residing at Anson, Tex. I know that Ruth D. Lister is a member of the 
Choctaw Tribe and is entitled to enrollment. 

Alexander Robinson. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 23d day of July, A. D. 1915. 

[SEAL.] T. R. Morgan, 

Notary Public, Stephens County, Okla. 



STATEMENT OF P. J. HURLEY, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHOCTAW NATION. 

In re application for the enrollment of Ruth D. Lister, nee Robinson, as a citizen 

of the Choctaw Nation. 

The foregoing petition and affidavit was served upon me for the enrollment 
of Ruth D. Lister, nee Robinson, as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

This petitioner alleges that she is the daughter of William P. Robinson and 
his wife, i]mily F. Robinson, who were married on June 15, 1882 ; that she was 
born on June 5, 1883, in Pickens County, Chickasaw Nation, but that her father 
was forced to leave the Choctaw-Chickasaw country as the result of some 
trouble in which he became involved during the spring of 1884, and that several 
years thereafter her mother moved with her to Tennessee, where she was resid- 
ing on June 28, 1898. Petitioner further states that her father returned to the 



318 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Indian Trritory in 1904 and was enrolled, together with his six children by his 
second wife, as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation in accordance with the 
act of August 1, 1914. 

This applicant states that she is now a resident of Maryville, Tenn., with 
her husband, Robert F. Lister. 

The testimony of this applicant has not been procured in connection with her 
claim, owing to the great distance of the petitioner's residence from Oklahoma. 

The records in the office of the Indian Office at Muskogee. Okla., show that 
on December 17. 1910, the testimony of William F. Robinson, the alleged father 
of Ruth D. Lister, was taken before Judge Pollock, assistant attorney for the 
Interior Department, and the following questions were asked : 

" Q. How old were you when you left, Mr. Robinson? — A. Well. I don't 
* * * I couldn't tell exactly, I don't believe. It was in '84. and I nuist have 
been about 23 years old. It was in 1884. 

" Q. Were you married at that time? — A. No, sir. 

" Q. When did you marry? — A. I married about 14 years ago; married in 
Mexico little over 14 years ago — in Mexico. 

" Q. Do you wish to present the name of your wife and children? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. What is your wife's name? — A. Levonia Robinson." 

Again, in the same testimony the following questions were asked : 

" Q. Were you ever married prior to your marriage to your wife, Levonia 
Robinson? — A. No, sir. 

" Q. What was her maiden name? — A. McCracken. 

" Q. Was she ever married prior to her marriage to you ? — A. No, sir. 

" Q. Have you lived together continuously since the date of that marriage up 
to the present time? — A. Yes, sir." 

From the testimony above quoted it will be seen that William F. Robinson 
was only 23 years of age when he moved away from Oklahoma and was not at 
that time married, and did not marry luitil 14 years thereafter in Mexico, and 
that his wife was named Levonia Robinson, nee McCracken. 

The records in the possession of the Indian Office at Muskogee, Okla., further 
show that the said William F. Robinson, together with his four children — Alice, 
Alpha, Ada B., and James William Robinson — were enrolled under the provi- 
sions of the act of August 1, 1914. These persons were enrolled not because 
they were legally entitled to enrollment but on the theory that William F. 
Robinson was a fugitive from justice and could not return to be enrolled. His 
minor children were enrolled by reason of the fact that they were of Choctaw 
blood and not responsible, on account of their minority, for not having secured 
their enrollment within the required time. 

If the statements made by Mr. Robinson, under oath, above quoted are true, 
this petitioner is not his daughter, or if she is his daughter she is an illegiti- 
mate child. 

Iluth D. Lister, the petitioner, alleges that she was born in 1882, and, accord- 
ing to her statement, she became of age in 1900. The rolls of citizenship of the 
Choctaw Nation were not closed until March 4, 1907, and during the seven years 
subsequent to her arrival at majority and prior to the closing of the rolls she 
made no application for her enrollment. No application for enrollment was 
made by the applicant until the foregoing petition was filed by Mr. Balliuger. 
15 years after the arrival of the claimant at her majority. 

The applicant, as stated before, resides in Tennessee, and we did not attempt 
to take her testimony, for the reason that to do so would incur considerable 
expense. If the case presented any meritorious features, we might be justified 
in making further investigation, but even if this applicant could prove she is 
the illegitimate child of William F. Robinson she would not be entitled to 
enrollment, for the reason she is a nonresident of the Choctaw Nation and did 
not make application for enrollment within the i-equired time. 

As we have stated in other cases, the ('hoctaw Nation has never agreed to 
the enroUment of William F. Robinson and his children. The enroHment of 
nonresidents of the Choctaw Nation is a violation of all the laws and customs of 
the Choctaw Nation, as well as the laws of the United States, on enrollment 
matters. Even if William F. Robinson had been equitably entitled to enroll- 
ment, the case of the applicant. Ruth D. Lister, is not parallel to that of her 
alleged father and one-half sisters. Admitting that perhaps all of the allega- 
tions made by the applicant are true, she is not entitled to enrollment. 

P. J. Hurley, 
National Attorney for the Choctaw Nation. 



INDIAIS^ APPROPRIATIOX BILL. 319 

CASE NO. 2. 

PKTITIO.X OF .TAMES GOINGS FOR HIMSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS BY 

BLOOD. 

Comes now .Tames CJoinus and sliows tlint he is .^)7 years of as^e and tliat he 
liA^es in Depew. Okla. 

That lie is a Choetaw Indian by birtli, by blood, by descent, and by residence; 
tliat ]w is the son of Henry Goings, who was a f nil-blood Choctaw Indian, and 
whose mother was Francis Goings, both of whom died when applicant was 
<iuite small ; that applicant does not remember his said father, but that he was 
10 years old when his mother died. 

That the said Fraiu-is was also a Ch(»ctaw Indian of the one-half blood. 

That applicant was born near old Shawneetown, in the Choctaw Nation, and 
that he lived there and near Durant, in said nation, until he was grown up; 
that he then went to western Oklahoma where he lived for about five years 
and returned to the Choctaw Nation wliL^re has has since lived; that he has 
sinc<> his return lived in Valient and sonth of there and that he built himself 
a liome on the public domain and held the same unmolested until allotment; 
that said home was ,")i miles south from A'alient. 

That the reason that he has not been enrttlled is : That he had always been 
recognized as a Choctaw citizen : that he was permitted to build a home on the 
public domain and otlierwise recognized and did not know that an enrollment 
by the Dawes Commission was necessary until his home was taken from him ; 
then he went to the Dawes Commission at Muskogee and they told him the 
roll was closed. 

That on the 2d day of September, 1SS5, he was duly and lawfully married 
to Lucy Goings, with whom he still lives; that there was born to this union 
the following-named children, to wit : Mamie Dyer, age 27 years ; Henry Goings, 
age 2G years ; Ella Roberts, age 24 years ; Hughs Goings, age 22 ye'ars ; Birdie 
(Joings, age 19 years; James Goings, age 18 years; Ben Goings, age 17 years; 
Francis Goings, age 13 years; Roseve't Goings, age 11 vears ; Maggie Goings, 
I)orn April 3, 190.5. 

Petitioner further shows that he is uneducated ; that he can not read or write, 
and that he lived in the confide::ce that his people would all be cared for with 
their own share of the common property of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians the 
siinie as the other Choctaw Indians were, l)ut that on account of his uneducated 
<-ondition and without any notice, he has been left off the I'oll, and his children, 
who were all minors, are also without enrollment for no other reason than 
that they were minors and that he did not know enough to care for their 
interests. 

Wherefore he now prays that his name. .Tames Goings, and the names of his 
said children, Mamie Dyer, Henry Goings. Ella Roberts, Hughs, Birdie, .Tames, 
Ben, Francis, Ro.sevelt, and Maggie Goings, be enrolled on the approved roll 
of ('hoctaws by blood, and that to them and each of them be given their dis- 
tributive share of the conunon property of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians the 
same as is given to all other members of said tribe. 

.Tames (his thumi) mark) Goings. 
State of Oklahoma, Mu^konvc County, ss: 

James Goings, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is the above- 
named James Goings ; that he has liad the above petition read over to him and 
knows the contents thereof; and that the matters and things therein contained 
are true. 

James (his thumb mark) Goings. 
Subscribed and sworn to l)(>fore me this 10th day of February, 191.5. I 
further cei-tily that I read over and fully explained the contents oi' the above 
l)etition to the affiant and that he knew the contents thereof and that he stated 
that same was true. 

[seal. Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 
My commission expires June 2, 1917. 

The name of James Goings was written by me at his n^iuest and in his 
presence and mark made by him in my presence. 

Julius Golden, Witness to Mark. 
The name of James G(Mngs was written by me at his request and in his 
presence and mark made by him in my presence. 
JUL1U.S Golden, Witness to Mark. 



320 INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL. 

SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION OF MAMIE DYER, IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF JAMES 
GOINGS FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Comes now IMamie Dyer and shows that she is 27 years of age and that she 
lives at Sapiilpa. Okla. 

That she is a Clioctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, and 
rocounition. as is shown by the petition of .Tames Goings, her father, made in 
her behalf, to which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That she has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof and 
that the matters and things therein contained are true. 

That on the 24tli day of October, 1911, she was duly and lawfully married to 
John O. Dyer, with whom she still lives, and that he took her out of the 
Choctaw Nation to Sapulpa, about one week ago. 

That she has been a recognized Choctaw ever since she could remember, and 
that she lived on the public domain with her said father, and assisted him in 
making the home on the public domain where they lived until same was allotted 
away from her father. 

That she herself was a minor during all the years of enrollment since she was 
born ; that the rolls were closed before she reached her majority, and although 
she was old enough to have been enrolled and allotted, neither her tribe nor her 
parents nor the United States, that presuming to act as her guardian, looked 
after her interests, and she has thus been deprived of her share of the common 
property of her tribe. 

That her name appears in the said petition of her said father at her request 
and that she hereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in the prayer 
thereto appended. 

Mamie Dyer. 
State of Oklahoma, 

Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the IGth day of February, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant and that she 
knew the contents thereof and that she stated that she was the above-named 
party and that said petition is true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917, 



supplemental petition of henry gains in support of the petition of 

JAMES gains for THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW 
INDIANS. 

Comes now Henry Gains and shows that he is 26 years of age and that 
he lives at Depew, Okla. , 

That he is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, and by residence 
as is shown by the petition of James Goings, his father, made in his behalf, to 
which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That he has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof and 
that the matters and things therein contained with reference to his relation- 
ship and residence and the relationship and residence of all of the other par- 
ties named therein, he knows to be true of his own knowledge ; that the matters 
and things tlierein contained with reference to the ancestors of his said 
mother and father, he has always been taught were true; that he has also 
been told that they were true by reliable parties that were personally acquainted 
with the parties and knew the facts, and that he believes them to be true and 
so charges the fact to be. 

That he has been a recognized Choctaw Indian ever since he could remem- 
ber ; that he helped his said father to clear up their home on the public 
domain and that they lived on it until allotment came and it was taken 
from them. 

That he was a minor during all the years of enrollment, but of suflicient 
age to have been enrolled and was not taken care of by his said father on 
account of the reasons stated in his petition; but that he has been deprived 
of his allotment solely on account of his minority. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 321 

Tliiit liis name appears in tlie said petition of his fatliei" at liis request 
and tliat lie lierel>y ratifies and contirnis tlie same and joins in tlie prayer 
tliereto appended. Hkxuy Gains. 

State of Oklahoma, 

Muskofjrc County, *'». 

Subscribed and sworn to before nie tins l(»tli day of February, 191.") ; I fur- 
ther certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant and that he 
laiew the contents thereof and that he states that same was true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, Notarii PuMic. 

My cojnmission expires .June 2, 1917. 



SUPPLEMENT.VL PETITION OF ELLA KOBEKTS IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF .lAAIES 
GOINGS FOU THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Comes now Ella Roberts and shows ; that she is a Choctaw Indian by birth, 
by blood, by descent, and by residence, as is shown by the petition of James 
Goings, her father, made in her behalf, to which this petition is attached and 
made a part. 

That she is 24 years of age, and that she lives now at Boley, Okla. 

That she has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof, and that 
the matters and things therein cimtained with reference to her relationship and 
i-esideiice and the relationshiii of all of the other i)arties named in said petition, 
she knows to ])e true of her own knowled.^e ; that the matters and thiiiys therein 
contained with reference to the ancestors of her said father and motlun-, she has 
always been tau.trht were true; that she has also been told that they were true 
by reliable persons that were personally acquainted with the parties and knew 
the facts ; and that she believes them to be true and so charges the fact to be. 

That she has been recognized as a Choctaw Indian in the Choctaw Nation 
ever since she could remember; that she split rails, made fence together with the 
other members of her said father's family to make a home for themselves the 
.same as other Choctaws had; that they lived on the same until allotment and 
then had to vacate. 

That she was a minor during all the years for enrollment and that her said 
father did i\ot look after her interests as stated in his petition, and that she 
could not ; that she has been deprived by law of an opportunity to even ask for 
her birthiMght, and all on account of her minority ; that she was of sufficient 
age to have been enrolled but was not. 

That on the 11th day of January, 1914, she was duly and lawfully married 
to Newton Roberts; 

That her name ai)i)ears in the ]»etition of her said father at her retiuest and 
tliat she hereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in the prayer thereto 
appended. 

Ella Roberts. 
State of Oklahoma, 

Mnskoffce County, ss: 

Subscribf'd and sworn to before me this the 10th day of Fi'lu'uary. 1915: I 
further certify that I i-ead over the above p<'tition to the afliant and that she 
knew the contents thereof and that she stated that same was true. 

[seal. 1 JuLiLTs Golden. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION OF HlT(iHS GOINGS IN SUPPORT Ol TlIK PETITION OF 
.IAMi;S GOINGS FOR THE ENROLI-MENT OF HIMSELF AND KAMII.V AS CHOCTAW 
INDIANS. 

Comes now Hughs Goings and shows that he is 22 years of age and that he 
lives at Castle, okla. 

That he is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, and by residences 
as is sliown by the petition of .tames (Joings, his father. nia(!(> in his behalf, 
fo which this ])etitioii is attached and made a pai"t. 

That he has read over said petition and knows the contents tliert-of and that 
the matters and things therein contained with reference to his relationship 
and i-esideiice and the relationshii» and residence of all of the other jiarties 
named tliereiiL \w knows to l)e true of his own knowledge; that the matters and 
things therein contained with reference to the ancestors of his said father 

31362—16 21 



322 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

and mother, he has always been taught were true; that he has also been 
Informed by reliable persons that were acquainted with the parties and Isnew 
the facts, and lie believes them to be true and so charges the fact to be. 

That he has been recognized as a Choctaw Indian ever since he could re- 
member, and that he helped his fatlier and the other members of the family 
to clear up the liome on the public domain south of Valient, on which they lived 
until allotment. 

That he was a minor during all the years of enrollment since he was bora 
and that the roll closed prior to his i-eaching his majority. 

That he was of sufficient age to have been enrolled and receive his allot- 
ment, and was deprived thereof on account of his minority and the further 
reasons set out in his said father's petition. 

That his name appears in his said father's petition at his request, and that he 
hereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in the prayer thereto appended. 

Hughs Goings. 

The name of Hughs Goings was written by me at his request and in his 
presence, and marli made by him in my presence. 

Attest : Julius Golden, Witness to Hark. 

Statk of Oklahoma, Mtiskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 10th day of February, 1915. 
I further certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant and that he 
knew the contents thereof and that he stated that the same was true. 

[seal.] Jut.ius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expii-es June 2, 1917. 



SUPPLEJtENTAL PETITION OF BIRDIE GOINGS IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF JAMES 
GOINGS FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Comes now Birdie Goings and shows that she is 19 years of age and that she 
lives at Depew, Okla. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by residence, and by descent, 
as is shown by the petition of James Goings, her father, made in her behalf, to 
which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That she has i-ead over said petition and knows the contents thereof, and that 
the matters and things thei'ein contained with reference to her relationship and 
residence and the relationship and residence of all of the other parties named 
therein she knows to be true of her own knowledge ; that the matters and things 
therein contained with reference to the ancestors of her said mother and father, 
she has always been taught were true ; that she has also been told that they 
were true by reliable persons that were personally acquainted with the parties 
and knew the facts, and that she believes them to be true and so charges the 
fact to be. 

Tliat she was born and raised at Valient, Choctaw Nation, and has been a 
recognized Choctaw Indian ever since she could remember; that she and the 
other children helped to clear up their home on the public domain ; that she 
Iftu'ucd bi-usli after she came home from school and a part of the night, and that 
they had a nice home ; that it was taken from them after allotment. 

That the Choctaw roll was closed before she reached her majority, and that 
her father, for the reasons stated in his said petition, did not look after her 
interests, and that she is left off the rolls solely because she was a minor and 
the rolls closed, although she was of age to have been enrolled. 

That her name appears in the said petition of her father at her request, and 
that she hereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in the prayer thereto 
appended. 

Birdie Goings. 
State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 10th day of February, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over and fully explained to the affiant the above 
petition and that she knew the contents thereof and that she stated that same 
was true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 323 

AFFIDAVIT OF ALEC NAIL IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF JAMES GOINGS FOK THE 
ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age 
and that his home is near Boggy Depot, Okla. 

I know the applicant, .James Goings ; that I was well and personally ac- 
quainted with both the father and mother of the applicant, Henry and Ffances 
Goings. 

The said Henry Goings was a full-blood Choctaw man, and I knew him from 
the time I could remember up until his death — that is, until I heard of his death. 
The said Henry Goings had three brothers; George was the oldest one, and 
that he died before the war ; he run for governor of the Choctaw Nation in the 
early days. The other two full brothers were James and Alfred Goings. 

The mother, Frances Goings, was a half-breed Choctaw. 

The father of Henry Goings— the grandfather of the applicant — was old 
Isaac Goings, and he was one of the emigrants from Mississippi in 1832. 

Affiant further states that the first time that he ever met this applicant was 
more than 30 years ago at Old Doaksville, Ind. T., Towson County. 

That applicant moved away from there, and so did I, and I did not keep 
track of him and have not met him again until lately. 

I am not acquainted with his family. Have seen them. 

Alec Nail. [His thumb print] 

The name of Alec Nail was written by me at liis request and in his presence 
and mark made by him in my presence, 

Jtjlius Golden. 
State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss. 

Subscribed and sworn to before nie this the 23d day of March, 191.5. I fur- 
ther certify that I read over to the affiant tlie above affidavit, and that he knew 
the contents thereof, and that he stated that same was correct and that he 
was the identical person named therein as affiant. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, Notary Public. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



affidavit of H. L. lewis in support OF THE PETITION OF JAMES GOINGS AND 

family. 

H. L. Lewis, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 28 years of age 
and that he lives at Muskogee, Okla. 

That he is well and personally acquainted with the applicant, and that he 
knows all the older members of his family. That he first knew him when he 
was snijill ; that, in fact, he has known him and them ever since he could 
remember. 

Affiant further stated that the applicant had his own home that he and his 
family made on the public domain. That he saw them making it, and knows 
that they lived on it until they were driven off during allotment. 

That he was living in the Choctaw Nation, and that he visited his family 
when he was growing up, and that is the way that he knows the older ones; he 
use to play with them. 

That li(> and all his family were Choctaws and so recognized, and that they 
have lived in the Choctaw Nation during all of that time, which is more than 
20 years. 

I have not seen him for a long time until lately, he moved to the Creek Nation. 

(Signed) H. L. Lewis. 

State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this thv. 19th day of February, 1915 ; I 
further certify that I read over the above affidavit to afiiant and that he knew 
the contents thereof, and flint he stated that the matters and things therein 
contained were true. 

[seal.] (Signed) Julius Golden, 

Notary Puhlic. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



324 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

STATEMKNT OF 1'. J. HT'RLEY, ATTOKNKY VOU THP; CHOCTAW NATION. 

In re npplicatioii of Janies Goings for enrollment of hini.self and family as citi- 
zens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

The foregoing petition was served ui)on nie by Mr. Webster Ballinger, an 
attorney at law, of Washington, D. C. 

The applicant, James (Joings, claims that he is an Indian by blood — the 
evidence shows that he is a negro. On the face of his petition the applicant 
admits that he did not make ajjplication for enrollment as a citizen of the 
Choctaw Nation within the time re(iuired by law. 

The act of July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. L., p. G41), by which the supplemental 
agreement between the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations and the United 
.States was ajiproved, jtrovides in part as follows: 

" * * * The application of no person whomsoever for enrollment shall 
be received after the expiiation of said ninety days." 

The 90 days herein referred to is 90 days after the ratification of the 
agreement by the Choctaw and Chickasaw jteojile. The agreement was ratified 
on September 2.5, 1902. 

If all the allegations contained in rhe ai-i)licaiifs petition were true ho 
would not now be entitled to enrollment under the law. He is not a bona fide 
resident of the Choctaw Nation, but resides at this time near Depew, in 
Creek County, (^kla., whicli is in the Creek Nation. 

The act of Congress ai»i>roved June 28, 1898, connnonly known as the Atoka 
agreement between the Choctaw-Chickasaw Nations and the United States 
(32 Stat. L., p. 49o), provides as foll(A\-s : 

"No person shall be enrolled who has not heretofore removed to and in 
good faith settled in the nation in which he claims citizenship." 

Without considering the legal bars to the enrollment of this ajiplicant, we 
are in a position to show that he is not eciuitably. or morally, entitle(l to citizen- 
shij) in the Choctaw .\ati(»n. He is not a.n Indian; he has all the appearances 
and characteristics of a fulUblood negro. His testimony, taken in this case 
at Tulsa, Oklahoma, on November 19, 1915, is attached hereto. This testi- 
money shows (hat he has always lived with negroes; that he is married to a 
negro woman ; that his mother was a negro woman who claimed to have some 
Indian blood, but when asked concerning his father the \vitne";s testified as 
follows : 

" Q. Of what blood was your father?— A. Full-blood Choctaw. 

■■ (j. Were your latliei- and mother marriedV — A. As far as I know. 

" Q. Your understanding is that they were not married, isn't that the idea? — 
A. Claimed to be married as far as I heird (hem say. Never saw my father." 

It seems that this negro assumed the name of "Goings" in order to attempt 
to establish a relationship between himself and a Choctaw family of that 
name. On this point the witness testified as follows : 

" Q. Where were you married? — A. Clarkesville, Red River Cotintv, Tex. 

" Q. Did you marry under the name of Janies Goings? — A. Yes, sir. 

" You are sure that you were married under the name of James Goings? — 
A. No, sir; I went in the name of stepfather when I married her. My step- 
father's name. 

" Q. You were married under (he name of James Davis? — A. Yes, sir. 

" (}. You were known by James Davis up (o (hat time? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. MarriiHl by the name of James Davis? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. Known by that name .since you have been married? — A. No, sir. 

" Q. When did you change your name to Goings? — A. Right after I married." 

This Negro attempts to show that he was recognized as a citizen of the 
(Mioctaw Nation, but wIkmi asked the (piestion : " Your name was never on any 
tribal roll that you know anything about?" He answered. "No. sir." 

Again he was' asked, "As a matter of fact you were not placed on any tribal 
roll because yon are of negro blood; is that the reason?" He answered, 
" Yes, sir." 

He attempted, however, to further establish the fact that he was recognized 
as a Choctaw, and said that he had been permitted to vote at one election in 
the Choctaw Nation. He was asked the cpiestion — "Who did you vote for?"— 
and he answered, " I voted in favoi- of the Choctaws." 

" Q. Was it an election for governor, or something of that kind? — A. Yes, 
sir; I think so. I think it was. 

" Q. Don't you kn()w who you vottvl for'^ — A. I couldn't rt'ad, you know." 



INDIAN APPKOPKJATION iilLl.. 325 

The testinioiiy of Jaiiios (Joliigs is suflicieiit to show (hat tlic allcjiiitions in 
the petition presented l).v Mr. liallin^er are false. The applicant is not an 
Indian — he is a ne^ro ; he does not reside in the Choctaw Nation; he never 
made an application for enrollment as a citizen of the Choctaw Nation until he 
was approached by the agents of Mr. P>allinfi:er and a petition was solicited from 
him. Tlie testimony on this point is interesting but it is not pertinent to the 
issues in this case. There is another matter, however, that is pertinent. To 
corroborate the fradulent and false allegations contained in the petition sub- 
mitted by Mr. Ballinger and his associates, this tirm of attorneys have pro- 
cured the aHldavit of Alec Nail, an old negro, who, prior to emancipation, was 
the slave of Jonathan Nail, a Choctaw Indian. This old negro is used by the 
tirm of Ballinger. Ijiidley & Kodkey as a professional witness. His atli(hivit 
is submitted by this tirm of attorneys in corroboi-iition of the allegations con- 
tained in the petition of James Goings. 

On November ."), 1915, Nail was called u|)on to testify in this case. His tes- 
timony is in full as follows: 

Dki'aktment of thk Interior, 

Ofkk'k oi- thk Si i'kkixtexdk.nt eok the Five Civilized Tribes. 

MHHko(i('(\ Okhi., Novcinhcr 5, IHIo. 
In the matter of the ap])lication for the enrollment of James Goings as a 
citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

ALEC NAIL, being first duly sworn by William L. Bowie, deputy clerk of the 

United States Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma, on oath, testifies 
as follows : 

I^xamination by P. J. Hrin.EV : 

Q. What is your name? — A. Alec Nail. 

Q. Where do you reside? — A. Muskogee, Ckla. 

Q. Are you an eiu'olled citizen of the Choctaw Nation? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Freedman or citizen by blood? — A. Freedman. 

Q. Do you know James tJoings?- — A. No, sir; only since he has been ti'ying 
to get on the rolls. 

Q. How long has he been trying to get on the rolls? — A. I don't know, sir. 
He filed petition liefoiv I knew him. 

Q. Do you know whether James (Joings is a Choctaw Indian? — A. He is not 
an Indian. 

Q. What is he? — A. Coloivd man. He looks <lark. 

Q. Do you know his father? — A. No, sir. 

<^. Do you know his mother? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You don't know whether Henry (Joings was his father or not? — A. There 
was a Henry Goings, but I don't know whether he was his father or not. 

Q. Do you know whether Francis (ioings was his mother'? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether the motbei- of .lames Goings was a liall'-breed 
Choctaw'/ — A. I don't know. 

Q. You don't know who she was? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you know the grandfather of the applicant. James Going.s, was named 
Isaac Goings and emigrated from Mississi|)pi"? — A. If tliat was his grandfather, 
lie came from Mississippi. My father said he came with them in 1832. I knowed 
him all right. 

Q. You did know the said Isaac Goings, but you don't know whether they 
were i-elated to each other or not?— A. They don't look alike. 

C>. W'\inl was Isaac (Joings's blood'/ — A. Plnni Indian. 

(J. And this man, James (Jcdngs, is a straight-out negro? — .\. Yes. sii-; he hioks 
like nie. 

CJ. You .stated that you never knew this ai)plicant until you met him in Bal- 
linger, Lindley & Uodkey's oflice? — A. First I ever saw of him. 

Q. Did you swear that you met him 30 years ago at Old Doaksville? — A. I 
have not been there since I was a boy 11 years old. 

ii. Then you didn't meet him at Doaksville *}0 years ago'/ — A. No, sir. 

Q. In this atlidavit pnrpoi'ted to have been signed by you and sworn to b(»fore 
Julius (ioldcn, a notarv public, did you make the following statement? 

(The following is a copy of the atlidavit purported to have been made and 
signed by Alec Nail :) 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn on oath states that he is 72 years of age, 
and that his home is near Boggy Depot, okla. 



326 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

" I know the applicant, James Goings ; that I was well and personally ac- 
quainted with both the father and mother of the applicant, Henry and Frances 
Goings. 

" The said Henry Goings was a full-blood Choctaw man, and I knew him from 
the time I could remember up until his death — that is, until I heard of his 
death ; the said Henry Goings had three brothers ; George was the oldest one, 
and that he died before the war ; he run for governor of the Choctaw Nation 
in the early days. The other two full brother were James and Alfred Goings. 

" The mother, Frances Goings, was a half-breed Choctaw. 

" The father of Henry Goings, the grandfather of the applicant, was old Isaac 
Goings, and he was one of the emigrants from Mississippi in 1832. 

"Affiant further states that the first time that he ever met this applicant was 
more than 30 years ago at Old Doaksville, Indian Territory, Towson County. 

" That applicant moved away from there and so did I, and I did not keep 
track of him and have not met him again until lately. 

" I am not acquainted with his family. Have seen them. 

"(Signed) Alec Nail (By thumb mark). 

" State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

" Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 23d day of March, 1915 ; I fur- 
ther certify that I read over to the affiant the above affidavit and that he knew 
the contents thereof and that he stated that same was correct, and that he was 
the identical person named therein as affiant. 

" [seal.] (Signed) Julius Golden, 

" Notary Public. 

" My commission expires June 2, 1917." 

A. Not a word of it is true. 

Q. You didn't swear to that? — A. Not that way. 

Q. It was not read to you in the form it now appears? — A. That testimony 
was made from the rolls. They showed me the roll book and made it out. 

Q. They didn't find on the roll where you met James Goings at Doaksville 
30 years ago? — A. I left there before 30 years ago. I have not been there since 
I was 11 years old. 

Q. You have not been back since then?— A. No, sir; I have not been back. I 
never lieard that before. 

Q. How much did James Goings pay you?— A. He was to pay me $2.50, and I 
think he paid me one dollar and six bits. 
(Witness excused.) 

Frank L. Doble, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he reported the 
proceedings in the above-entitled case on November 5, 1915, and that the above 
and foregoing is a true and correct transcript of his stenographic notes taken 

thereof. 

Frank L. Doble. 

Subscril)ed and sworn to before me this 13th day of November, 1915. 

R. P. Haerison, Clerk. 
By William L. Bowie, Deputy. 

This testimony furnishes a fair example of the credence that should be 
placed in sworn "statements submitted by Mr. Ballinger and his associates. 

There is a litttle conflict between James Goings and Alec Nail as to the 
amount Goings i)aid Nail for making the affidavit. Goings, in testifying, 
swore as follows : ^^ 

" Q. What did Alec Nail charge for making an affidavit for you? — A. $5. 

Any reasonable man, after having seen the chief applicant and having heard 
his testimony and the testimony of his witnesses, could not be so misled as to 
believe that "there would be any possibility, even by the most astute fraud, to 
procure the enrollment of the applicant as a Choctaw Indian by blood. Mr. 
Ballingcn- and his associates are reasonable men, and we are led to ask the 
question why do they submit a petition for the enrollment of a negro as a 
citizen bv blood of tlie Choctaw Nation on evidence as unsubstantial and as 
false as that which appears in this case. I believe that we will to some extent 
find the answer to this question in the testimony of the chief applicant. 

The office of Ballinger, Lindley & Rodkey, attorneys at law, was in the 
same building with the office of the superintendent of the Five Civilized Tribes 
at Muskogee. The chief applicant testifies that he was taken to that office by 
an agent of Ballinger, Lindley & Rodkey and was led to believe that Mr. 



IISTDIAN APPROPRIATIOISr BILL. 327 

Lindley was iu the service of the Interior Department. A part of his testimony 
is as follows : 

"Q. Where did you sec- Mr. Lindley?— A. Muskogee, Interior Office. 

"(}. What office? — A. Up in the Government office. About one story up. 

" Q. On the second floor? — A. North end." 

Then the witness testified as follows : 

"Q. What did Mr. Lindley tell you?— A. He told me that I would have to 
employ an attorney to investigate. 

" Q. Did he suggest some attorney to you ? — A. I asked him who was attor- 
ney there, and he said there was two or three around there, and about that 
time in walked Nelson Durant, and I employed Nelson Durant. 

" Q. What sort of a contract did you make with Nelson Durant? — A. I was 
to pay him cash in hand. I was to pay him $27. 

" Q. Did you pay him the money ? — A. Yes, sir ; $27. 

" Q. Pay him that day ? — A. No, sir. After I was down there and he told me 
to bring those five grown children. 

" Q. Did you pay him anything at all the first time? — A. $7.50. 

" Q. For what pui-pose did you pay him this $7.50? — A. He claimed he had 
to go and look up the books. 

" Q. You paid him $7.50 to look up the books? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. What books was he to look up? — A. I don't know, sir. He didn't tell 
me particularly what books. 

" Q. You gave him $7.50 in cash? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. First time you were down there? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. When was that? — A. Along in February. 

"Q. Of this year?— A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. Any one witness you paying him that money? — A. No, sir; there was 
nobody in the office but me and him at that time. 

" Q. Did he give you a receipt for it? — A. Yes, sir; but I haven't it here. 

" Q. You have the receipt at home? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. He said to come back again with your five children? — A. Grown chil- 
dren. 

" Q. You took them back ? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. When did he tell you about bringing more money down?— A. He said 
all those grown ones would have to pay $5 apiece for entering fees. What he 
said 

" Q. You went down there afterwards and took your five grown children with 
you? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. What's the names of these children? — A. Mamie Dyer 

" Q. Where does she live? — A. Sapulpa. 

" Q. What's her husband's name? — A. J. D. Dyer. 

" Q. Do they live in town? — A. No, sir; a mile and half out. 

"Q. Which direction?— A. West. 

" Q. Name of the next oldest? — A. Henry. 

" Q. Where does he live?— A. I don't know, sir, where his home may * * * 
I haven't seen him since I carried him to Muskogee. 

" Q. Name the next oldest?— A. Ella Roberts. 

"Q. Wife of Martin Roberts?— A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. Live at Boley? — A. Live out about 1 mile from Boley. Have moved 
near Castle. Got a letter from hor last week. 

" Q. Did you take Hugh along with you? Does Hugh live at Depcw? — A. No, 
sir. Hugh lives out from Castle. 

" Q. Did you take Hugh along with you? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. Take Birdie?— A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. Birdie live at Depew?— A. Yes, sir. Lives with me. 

" Q. Birdie, a boy or girl? — A. A girl. 

" Q. Did each of tlK^so children take money along with them? — A. No, sir. 

" Q. They didn't give any money? — A. I got the money myself. 

" Q. Had he told you that you would have to bring .some more money? — A. $10 
more; $17.50 for me. 

" Q. Did you take him that $10? You gave him that $10?— A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. How much more? — A. $5 apiece for the children. 

"Q. How much in all? — A. $25. 

" Q. Gave him $25 for the children? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. They paid you the money to give to him? — A. All but one; that was 
Birdie. Slie was living with me, and I i)ay hers. 

"Q. How much did this make in all that you paid Durant? — A. $10, $17.50, 
and $25. Let's see, $42.50 in all ; would be .$42.50, near as I could come to it. 



328 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

" Q. Did vou f,'et any receipt for the money?— A. I got a receipt for myself 
for $17.50. lie told me he would send all the receipts of the kids, their receipts. 

" Q. Do vou know whether he did this? — A. No, sir; I don't. 

" Q. Did" you have any understanding as to whether Mr. Lindley or this 
man Durant were in the Government service? — A. I understood that Mr. Lind- 
lev was in the Government service. 

'" Q. Who told you that Mr. Lindley was in the Government service?— A. He 
told uie himself. He was working for the Government, and lie was not allowed 
to charge any fees. If Government knew he charged any fees he would be 
hoisted from the office. 

" Q. He told you that himself ?— A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. Anyone else present when he told you?— A. Yes, sir; I think, if I make 
no mistake, there was an old man, Nails. 

" Q. Alex Nails? — A. Yes, sir; if I make no mistake, think he was in 
there at the time. 

" Q. What did Durant tell you? He tell you he was in Government service? — 
A. He said he was attorney looking \ip the cases, like for myself. 

" Q. Wliat did he tell you about Lindley?— A. He said he would look up 
mv case, and if it was agreement with Mr. Lindley * * *. Whatever Mr. 
Lindley said when he looked it up * * *. When he looked it up he would 
turn it over to Mr. I^indley. 

" Q. Do you know whether Mr. Webster Ballinger, of Washington, D. C, 
was connected with that office? — A. I heard he was after I went in. 

" Q. Did you sign any contract agreeing to pay anyone any more money? — 
A. Not at that time I didn't. 

" Q. Did you sign any contract at any other time? — A. Yes. sir; a contract 
several years ago with Mr. Ballinger. 

" Q. Several years ago? — A. About 8 or 9 years ago. 

" Q. Not this year? — A. Not as I know of. 

" Q. Did you sign a power of attorney to Ballinger, Lindley, or Durant? — A. 
Well, Mr. Lindley told me that Mr. Ballinger was attorney. 

" Q. Did you sign any power of attorney? — A. Well, I don't know, sir. I tell 
you just like it is. I couldn't read, and I couldn't tell you what I signed. 
Only touched that paper there with my hand." 

Does this testimony not indicate that these attorneys are not taking these 
l)etitions with the hope of having these negroes enrolled as citizens by blood 
of the Choctaw Nation? On the contrary, would this testimony not indicate 
that the juirpose of these transactions is to .secure from these ignorant and 
gullible negroes whatever funds they may have on hand? 

It is unfair to the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations to cause them to hire 
attorneys and to incur the expense of investigating petitions procured by Mr. 
Ballinger and his associates, as evei-y petition .submitted by them indicates that 
the propaganda carried on by these attorneys is not for the purpose of securing 
the enrollm(>nt of these applicants, but for the purpose of securing funds from 
them. The cases of applicants are taken I'egardless of merit if they have 
funds to give to these attorneys. 

The question of the impersonation of a United States otlicer <ind of ()I)taining 
money under false pretenses are questions that are not pertinent to the issues 
in this argument. 

It might l)e well, however, to call the attention of the connuittee to that por- 
tion of the act of August 1, 1914 (88 Stat. L., 582), which is as follows: 

" Unless the consent of the L^nited States shall have been previously given, 
all contracts made with any person or persons now oi" hereafter applicants for 
enrollment as citizens in the Five (Mvilized Tribes for compensation for services 
in relation thereto, are hereby declared to be void and of no effect, and the 
collection or receipt of any moneys from any such applicants for citizenship 
shall constitute an offense against the laws of the United States, punishable by 
a fine of not exceeding .$500 or imprisonment for not exceeding six months, or 
both, and lands allotted to such aiiplicants, whether Indians or freedmen. shall 
not be affected or encumbei'ed by any deed, debt, or obligation of any character 
<'ontract(Hl i)rior to the time at which said land may be alienated under the laws 
of the United Stales." 

Without considering the questions of receiving money under false pretense 
and impersonating officers of the United States, it seems that Mr. Ballinger 
and his associates have unquestionably violated the foregoing law. 

P. F. Hurley, 
National Attorney for the Choctaw Nation. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 329 

Department of the Intekiok. 
Office of Superintendent, Five Civilized Tribes, 

Tiisla, Okla., Novrnibcr I'J, JDI5. 
In the matter of the application for enroUnient of James Goings for himself 
and family as Choctaw Indians hy blood. 

JAMES GOINGS, being first duly sworn by William L. Bowie, United States 
deputy clerk of the United States Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma, 
on oath testified as follows : 

Examination by Mr. William L. Bowie : 

Q. Please state your name? — A. James Goings. 

Q. Your age? — A. Fifty-nine. I was 58 when I gave that in. 

Q. Do you know in what year you were born? — A. I can't keep up with the 
years, but I know that the time I was born, up to what my mother said, was 
about six years before surrender. 

Q. About six years before surrender? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where do you live? — A. Depew. 

Q. Near Depew, Okla.? — A. Yes, sir; three miles and a half. 

Q. Which direction? — A. Southwest. 

Q. Depew is in the Creek Nation, is it not? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is your occupation? — A. Farming. 

Q. Married? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is the name of your wife? — A. Lucy. 

Q. What was her name before she married? — A. Lucy. Do you mean sur- 
name? 

Q. Yes. — A. Mackey. 

Q. Was she married before she married you? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Father's name was Mackey? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Colored woman? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What color? — A. Dark complexion. 

Q. Darker than yourself? — A. Yes, sir; good deal. 

Q. How much negro blood do you claim to have?— A. One-fourth. 

Q. Which side did you get that negro blood — from father or mother, or 
both? — A. Mother's side. 

Q. What degree of negro blood did your mother have? — A. Called one-half. 

Q. What was the other half? — A. Indian. 

Q. What kind of Indian l)lood? — A. Choctaw. 

Q. Of what blood was your father? — A. Full-blood Choctaw. 

Q. Were your father and mother married? — A. As far as I know. 

Q. Your undersanding is (hat they were not married; isn't that the idea? — 
A. Claimed to be married as far as I heard. Never saw my fatlier. 

Q. As a matter of fact, full-blood (5hoctaws did not marry colored persons. 
Was not permitted at all.^ — A. They did. If they wanted them for a wife. 

Q. Did you ever know a full-blood Choctaw to marry a colored person? — A. 
Yes, sir. One lives near me now at Depew. Full-blood Indian woman married 
to full-blood negro. 

Q. Choctaws? — A. Said she was a Choctaw. 

Q. Isn' she a Creek? — A. Told me Choctaw. Full-blood (Mioctaw. 

Q. Who was your father? — A. Henry Goings. 

Q. Is he dead? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did he die? — A. I couldn't tell. Died when I was quite small. 
Never saw him. 

Q. How do you know whether Henry (lOings was your father? — A. My 
mother. From my mother. 

Q. Simi)ly representation? — A. I'es, sir. 

Q. Yom* mother told you? — A. YYs, sir. 

Q. Your father and mother lived together'^' — A. So she said. 

Q. How old were you when yiuir father died? — A. She said about 3 years old. 

Q. Where did your father die? — A. He died in the (Jhoctaw Nation. Near 
Shawneetown. 

Q. How far? — A. Don't know, sir. 

Q. In what direction? — A. All I know old Siiawneetown was about 3i miles 
from Idabel. 

Q. How far from Shawneetown did your father die? — A. I couldn't say 
exactly. 



330 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Q. Do you know where he was born ? — ^A. No, sir ; but I know he died in 
Shawneetown. 
Q. Did your father have any brothers? — A. Yes, sir. 
Q. Do you know the name of the brotlier?— A. Alfred Goings. 
Q. Have any other brothers? — A. Some other brothers. I heard my uncle 
Alfred call their names. 
Q. How many? — A. Two. 

Q. Three altogether? — A. Yes, sir; I know there was three. 
Q. You don't know the names of either of the brothers other than Alfred? — 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he have any sisters? — A. Well, yes, sir; he had some sisters; but I 
don't know the names. 

Q. You don't know the names of any sister? — A. No, sir. 
Q. How many did he have? — A. Don't know, sir. 
Q. You never knew any of his sisters? — A. No, sir. 
Q. Any of his brothers? — A. Just Alfred and grandfather. 
Q. Your father's father? — A. Yes, sir. 
Q. What was his name? — A. Isaac Goings. 
Q. Where did he live? — A. Near Shawneetown. 
Q. What blood was your grandfather? — A. Full blood. 
Q. What became of Alfred Goings? — A. They sent him to the penitentiary. 
Q. For what? — A. Married twice without license. 

Q. When was that? — A. Been something between eight or nine years ago. 
Q. Where was he sent to the penitentiary from? — A. I think it was Idabel. 
Q. What penitentiary was he sent to? — A. I don't know. Just know he was 
sent to the penitentiary. 

Q. Before Statehood ?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Sent up for bigamy, you say? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know these wives; do you know either of these women he mar- 
ried? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know the names of eitlier of them? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do "you know anything about your grandmother on your father's side? — 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Was your father married more than once? — A. I don't know, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether your father had any children besides yourself? — • 
A. Never' heard of any. If he had I might have heard. Never any claim kin 
to me. 

Q. Did you have any brother of full blood? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Any sister of full blood? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Have any sister of half blood? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Have any brother of the half blood? — A. Yes, sir. On my mother's side. 

Q. Not on your father's side? — A. No, sir. 

Q. How many half brothers on your mother's side? — A. Only one. 

Q. What is his name? — A. His name is Lewis. 

Q. What was his other name? — A. Lewis Davis. 

Q. Where does Lewis Davis live?— A. In Marshall, Tex. 

Q. In the town? — A. About 1 mile from town. 

Q. How old is Lewis?— A. About 32. 

Q. Considerably younger than you are? — A. I am the oldest. 

Q. Oldest one of your mother's children? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Don't know how old she was when you were born? — A. I never heard her 
say. 

Q. Did you say you had a sister of the half blood? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Your mother's child? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many? — A. One. 

Q. State the name of this sister? — A. Patsy. 

Q. Is Patsy dead? — A. No, sir; she is living. 

Q. What is her present name? — A. She married, but I don't know who she 
married. Her first name was Patsy Davis, same as brother Lewis. 

Q. How long has she been married?— A. About 8 or 10 years. I haven't had a 
letter for 8 or 10 years. 

Q. Where does she live? — A. Marshall, Tex. 

Q. Was this half sister and half brother enrolled?— A. No, sir. 

Q. Did either one apply for enrollment ?— A. Not that I know of. Not to 
my knowledge. 

Q. Was your mother a slave? — A. Not as I know of. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 331 

Q. What was your Tinderstanding about it? — A. I never heard of her being a 
slave. She lived with my grandfather, Isaac Goings, with him. 

Q. Was she a slave of Isaac Goings? — A. She might have been; J don't know. 

Q. Isn't that your understanding, that she was a slave of Isaac Going? — A. I 
couldn't say it. 

Q. AVas she ever enrolled ? — A. Not as I know of. 

Q. Was she ever enrolled as a freedman? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know anything about your mother's father? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Your mother's mother? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was her name? — A. Patsy. 

Q. Her surname? — A. No, sir; knew her by my mother. 

Q. Did you ever see this grandmother? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Dead before you were bora? — A. Yes, sir ; must have died before I was born. 
Never saw her. 

Q. Your mother have any sisters? — A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Any brothers? — A. No, sir ; not that I know of. 

Q. Where were you born? — ^A. I was born, so my mother said, about li miles 
from old Shawneetown. 

Q. Which direction? — A. Between old Shawneetown and Horseshoe Lake. I 
suppose that would be about southwest. 

Q. Born on the Goings place? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Isaac Goings's place? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is your mother living? — A. No, sir. 

Q. How long has she been dead ? — A. Been dead for 35 or 40 years. 

Q. How old were you when she died? — A. I was a man grown. I guess I was 
about 20, maybe more. 

Q. You were about 20, maybe more? — A. I was at that time. 

Q. Is your mother's name on any tribal roll that you know anything about? — 
A. No. sir. ' 

Q. Is your father's name on any tribal roll that you know anything about? — 
A. I couldn't say. 

Q. You lived with your mother until she died? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long did she stay on the Isaac Goings's place after you were born?— 
A. She said she stayed there about three years. I was about 3 years old. 

Q. Where did she go? — A. She went to a little town they called in Choctaw 
Nation above Hugo. I can't call the name of that place. She stayed there 
several years. 

Q. Above Hugo? — A. Yes, sir. It wasn't Hugo at that time. I forgot the 
name. 

0. How long did she live there? — A. Several years, she said. 

Q. That was in the Choctaw Nation? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Whose place did she live on? — A. I don't know, sir. 

Q. Where did she go from there? — A. She went from there to just about 20 
miles from Choctaw Nation — there in Texas. Let me see. * * * sf,e lived 
there. * * * 

Q. How long did she live there? — A. She lived there, she told mo. five or six 
years. 

Q. Were you with her? — A. No, sir ; not at that time. 

Q. Whei'e were you? — A. In the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. Where? — A. Above Antlers. 

Q. You said you lived with your mother up until she died? — A. I was there 
when she died. Didn't stay with her continuously. 

Q. Were you ever with your mother any more than this time you speak of? — 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Hf)w old Avere you when your mother went to Texas? — A. Sixteen. 

Q. You didn't go to Texas? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You say you went up above Antlers? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who with? — A. First one and then another. 

Q. How long did you stay around Antlei-s? — A. Two or three years. 

Q. Where did you go then?— A. I went to this town above * * *. There 
was no town there then * * *. It was called * * *. I can't get that 
place * * *. It was out from a little town where they didn't allow negroes. 

Q. Durant? — A. Out from Durant about 3 miles. I lived tlioro for two years. 
On a ranch. * * * 

Q. Whose ranch was that? — A. Choctaw ranch. 

Q. Who controlled it? — A. A man by the name of Tom Edwards. 

Q. How long did you stay there? — A. Two years. 



332 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Q. Then whore did you go?— A. To Ardmore. 

Q. How long at Ardmore? — A. Three years. • 

Q. Right in the town? — A. No, sir; out in the country. 

Q. Work around there? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Doing day's worlv? — A. Lahor. 

Q. Farm hand?— A. Yes, sir. Riding horses, riding stock. 

Q. Where did you go next? — A. Then I went bacli to Texas and married. 

Q. How long had you been in Texas when you were married?— A. First year 
I went there. 

Q. Who did you marry down there? — A. Luc^. 

Q. Your present wife? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. She is still living? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Lucy; what is her other name? — A. Lucy Mackey. 

Q. Where were you married? — A. Clarkesville, Red River County, Tex. 

Q. Did you marry under the name of .Tames Goings? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You are sure that you married under the name of .James Goings? — A. No, 
sir. I went in the nanie of stepfather when I married her. My stepfather's 
name. 

Q. You were nuirried under the name of James Davis? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You were known by James Davis up to that time? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. INIarried by name of James Davis? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Known by that name since you have been nuirried? — A. No, sir. 

Q. AVhen did you change your name to Goings? — ^A. Right after I married. 

Q. When did you come to be known as Goings? — A. Right after I married. 

Q. Let it be known that your right name was Goings? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You have been going by that name since? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is the name you are known by around Depew? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You have several children? — A. Ten. 

Q. Any dead? — A. One. 

Q. Ten living and one dead? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where was Mamie Dyer born? — A. Born in town of Clarkesville. 

Q. Do you know what date she was born? — A. About 27, her age. 

Q. Where was Roosevelt born? How old is he? — A. He is about 12 years old. 

Q. You can prove the date of his birth? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where was he born? — A. About 2 miles from Valliant, Okla. 

Q. Valliant, in the Choctaw Nation? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where was James Goings born? — A. He was born in the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. Where? — A. Down near the same place. 

<}. Down near Valliant? — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. Have an attending physician? Have a doctor? — A. No. sir. Granny 
woman. 

Q. What was the name of the granny woman? — A. Sarah. 

Q. AVhere was Ella Roberts born? — A. She was born at Clarke.sville. 

Q. Where was Birdie born? — A. In the Choctaw Nation. 

(}. Where was Ben born? — A. In Choctaw Nation. 

Q. Birdie was born at Clarkesville? — A. No, sir; Ella. 

Q. Where was Hugh born? — A. In Choctaw Nation. 

Q. Where? — A. Down near same place. 

Q. Near Valliant? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where was Henry born?— A. In Clarkesville. 

Q. Mamie. Henry, and Ella born in Clarkesville? — A. Yes, sir. Rest born in 
Choctaw Nation. 

Q. You give the ages of these children in the application you have filed by 
Webster Ballinger as IMamie Dyer 27, Henry Goings 26. Ella Roberts 24, Hugh 
Goings 22, Birdie Goings 19, James Goings IS. Ben Goings 17, Francis Goings 
13, Roosevelt Goings 11. Maggie born April 3. 190.1. You say that the first 
three of these were born in Clarkesville, Tex.? — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. And you say Hugh, Birdie, James, Ben, and Francis were born out south 
of Valliant? — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. All born on same place? — A. No, sir; we lived on one place two years. 
Moved in the same neighborhood. 

Q. Where was Roosevelt horn? — A. Born two miles of Valliant. I lived 2 
miles of Valliant when last two children were born, Roosevelt and Maggie. 

Q. Rest of them born, those five, south of Valliant? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Pretty close to river?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Red River? — A. Yes, sir. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 333 

Q. This child tliat is dead, whore did that one come in? — A. Hetween Hugh 
and Birdie. 

Q. Where was it horn? — A. Born down there, too. 
Q. South of Valiant? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. In Choctaw^ Nation, this side of Red River? — A. Yes, sir. 
Q. The ages of these children, were they taken from any record?— A. Not tliat 
I know of. 

Q. Were these ages given in from any memorandum, any record or memo- 
randum?— A. If any were taken * * * Just one. I had a doctor for her. 

Q. I asked if you took the ages of these children from any Bihle or record?— 
A. No, sir. 

Q. How did you arrive at the age of these children? — A. Kei)t them in my 
memory. I ain't got no book. * * * j ajn't g„t no education. * * * \vhj,t j 
go by I keep in my head. 

Q. Your name was never on any tribal roll that you know anything about? — 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Why not? Why was it omitted? — A. Because I neglected it. Didn't pay 
any mind to it. * * * Didn't think there was anything * * * 

Q. As a matter of fact you were not placed on any tribal roll because you 
are of negro blood, is that the reason? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You were not recognized as a citizen of the Choctaw Nation? — A. I always 
been recognized by Indians by blood. * * * 

Q. You never voted? You never voted on tribal matters? — A. I voted once 
before statehood. 

Q. Once where? — A. Valiant. 

Q. Why was it you were not permitted to vote at other times".' — A. Didn't try. 
Didn't care anything about it. Didn't go to the polls. 

Q. (Jould you have voted if your name was not on some of the tribal rolls? — A. 
I don't know, sir. I was allowed to vote then. I never did try to vote again. 
Q. What kind of an election? — A. Some ofhce election of the Choctaws. 
Q. Who did you vote for? — A. I voted in favor of the Choctaws. 
Q. Was it an election for governor or something of that kind? — A. Yes, sir; I 
think so. I think it was. 

Q. Don't you know who you voted for? — A. I couldn't read, you know. 
Q. How long did you live in Texas at Clarkesville? — A. Four years. 
Q. Then when you left there where did you go? — A. Choctaw Nation. 
Q. South of Valiant? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long did you live there? — A. Ten or eleven years. 

Q. Where did you live when you left there? — A. Moved about 1 mile of 
Valiant, maybe about a mile and a quarter. 

Q. How long did you live there ?--A. Six years. 

Q. Where did you go when you left then'? — A. \\'lien I left tlunx- I come over 
into Creek Nation. 

Q. What name were you known by when you were down south of Valiant? 
Goings? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. All the time? — A. Yes, sir. 
Q. All know you by James Goings? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Didn't know you by the name of James Davis? — A. They knew I had that 
name. 

Q. Suppose I went down there and inquired for James doings, would tlic 
people know you by that name? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Suppose I incpiired for James Davis, would they know you by that name? — 
A. They W(udd know by my ste])father. They knew T always said that was not 
my father. 

Q. Ifld you at any time have to take out intrudei-'s permit to live in the 
('hoctaw Nation? Did you have to .secure a permit as an intruder in the 
Choctaw Nation'/ — A. No, sir. 

Q. Never obtained a permit at any time? — A. No, sir. 
Q. Did you pay any license to the Choctaw Nation'/ — A. No, sir. 
Q. Your occupation has always i)een that of a farmer and stockman? — A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Did your mother ever hjive any husband other than tills man Davis? — A. 
No, sir ; not as I know of. 

Q. Have you any idea when she married Davis'/ — A. No, sir. 
Q. Was it before you were born? — A. No, sir; I know she didn't marry him 
before I was born. I was three years old when she nuirried. 
Q. What was his given nanie'/ — A. Ben Davis. 



334 INDIAN APPROPRIATION lilJ.r.. 

Q. Ben Davis a colored man? — A. Yes, sir. 
Q. AVas ho a froednian? — A. I don't Ivnow what he was. 
Q. Don't know whether he was a Choctaw freedman? — A. No. 
Q. Wasn't a citizen of the Choctaw Nation? — A. I don't Jjnow. 
Q. Where did lie live?— A. In Marshall. 

Q. AVhen did your mother marry him? Before she left the Choctaw Nation? — 
A. No, sir; she said she married at this little town I was trying to tell you 
about. * * * 

Q. Married in the Choctaw Nation? — A. No, sir; in Texas. 
Q. Then she lived in Texas until she died? — A. Not then. She lived down 
there at that little place. * * * Between Hugo there, a place called * * *. 
Q. In Texas or in the Choctaw Nation? — A. In the Choctaw Nation. Lived 
there seven years. 

Q. After she married Davis? — A. Yes, sir. 
Q. Where did he die?— A. At Marshall, Tex. 

Q. Do you know when he died? — A. No, sir; not exactly. When I knowed he 
was dead it had been about six years. 

Q. How long ago was it that he died, do you suppose? — A. He has been dead 
about 16 or 17 years. 

Q. Did he live in the town of Marshall? — A. No, sir. 
Q. How far from there? — A. About a mile and a quarter. 
Q. Did he marry again after your mother died? — A. Yes, sir. 
Q. Know the name of the woman? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he have any children by this other woman ?^A. Not that I know of. 
Q. Do you know, as a matter of fact, that he did or did not have any chil- 
dren? — A. Not as I heard anyone say. 
Q. You don't know? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You have made out papers looking to your enrollment as a Choctaw by 
blood? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who made out these papers for you? — A. Mr. Lindley. 
Q. Lindley? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did you see Mr. Lindley? — A. Muskogee, Interior office. 
Q. What office"? — A. Up in the Government office. About one story up. 
Q. On the second floor? — A. North end. 
Q. Building used by the Government offices?— A. Yes, sir. 
Q. AVho told you to go down there? Who told you about Lindley? — A. I was 
taken papers, and my wife read in the papers where this office was going to be 
open January 1, so I got myself ready and went down there. 

Q. Had you talked With anyone about going before you went down there? — A. 
About enrolling? 

Q. Yes.— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. To whom had you talked? — A. A man where I live. I live on his place 
now. 

Q. What is his nam.e? — A. Charles Edwards. 
Q. That all the name he has? — A. As far as I know. 

Q. What did Edwards tell you? — A. He said he thought I could get on if I 
come * * * if I could get * * * if I could tell the right evidence. 
Q. Was he working for these people? — A. I am working on his place. 
Q. Was he working for these people? — A. Mr. Lindley? No, sir. 
Q, You on Edwanis place yet? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who is this Charles Gould? — A. I don't know, sir. He told me * * * 
he tells me his name is Charles Edwards. If his name is Gould, he has put it 
on since he is Choctaw by blood. 

Q. He made an npplication under the name of Edwards? — A. Yes, sir. 
Q. That the reason why you said his name was Ed\\ards? — A. Yes, sir. 
Q. Everyone Know.s him by the name of Charles Gould? — A. I don't know. 
Q. Never heard his name of Edwards until after this application was made 
out? — A. He always told me Edwards. 
Q. Is he a white man? — A. Ye.s, sir. 

Q. Looks like white man to yon?— A. He might be Indian; don't know 
whether he is part white man or not. 
Q. How old?— A. 40 or 45. 

Q. Is he a tall man? — A. .Just about my height. 
Q. How tall are you?— A. 5-11. 

Q. What is his complexion? — A. .lust about a shade darker than you; and 
kind of freckle face. 

Q. Wear a mustache? — A. Yes, sir. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 335 

Q. Wear beard? — A. Sometimes; shave clean sometimes. 

Q. How is lie now? — A. Shaved clean. 

Q. Black hair?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Has Gould been working for these people? — -A. Not as I know of. 

Q. What did Gould represent to you? Did he represent that the rolls Were 
open?— A. No, sir; he didn't represent to me that the.v were opened. 

Q. What did he tell you about it? — A. He told me after I was telling him 
about a * * *. He was reading in his papers and he said, " Jim, this roll 
is going to be open." Seems * * * since you said * * * j i^-^ve been 
reading wiiere tliese rolls are going to 

Q. You stay * * *, You went to Muskogee?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who did you see? — A. Mr. Lindley. 

Q. See anyone else? — A. No, sir; there was a gentleman in the oflice, but I 
can't place him. 

Q. What did Mr. Lindley tell you?— A. He told me that I would have to 
employ an attorney to investigate. 

Q. Did he suggest some attorney to you? — A. I asked him who was attorney 
there, and he said there was two or three around there, and about that time in 
walked Nelson Durant, and I employed Nelson Durant, 

Q. What sort of a contract did you make with Nelson Durant? — A. I was to 
pay him casli in hand. I was to pay him ,$27. He said he would look up the 
book. He would charge $27. 

Q. Did you pay him the money? — A. Yes, sir; $27. 

Q. Pay him that day? — A. No, sir. After I was down there and he told me 
to bring those five grown children. 

Q. Itid you pay him anything at all the first time? — A. $7.50. 

Q. For what purpose did you pay him this $7.50? — A. He claimed he had to 
go and look up the books. 

Q. You paid him $7.50 to look up the books? — A. Y'"es, sir. 

Q. AVhat books was he to look up? — A. I don't know, sir. He didn't tell me 
particularly what books. 

Q. You gave him $7.50 in cash? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. First time you were down there? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When was that? — A. Along in February. 

Q. Of this year? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Anyone witness you paying him that money? — A. No, sir; there was no- 
body in the office but me and him at that time. 

Q. Did he give you a receipt for it? — A. Yes, sir; but I haven't it here. 

Q. You have the receipt at home? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He said to come back again with your five children? — A. Grown children. 

Q. You took them back? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did he tell you about bringing more money down? — A. He said all 
those grown ones would have to pay $5 apiece for entering fees. What he 
said * * *, 

Q. You went down there afterwards and took your five gffown children with 
you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What's the names of these children? — A. Mamie Dyer. * * * 

Q. Where does she live? — A. Sapulpaa. 

Q. What's her husl)and's name? — A. J. D. Dyer. 

Q. Do they live in town? — A. No, sir; a mile and a half out. 

Q. What direction?— A. West. 

Q. Name of tlie next oldest? — A. Henry. 

Q. Where does he live? — A. I don't know, sir, where his home may * * *. 
I haven't seen him since I carried him to IVIuskogee. 

Q. Name the next oldest. — A. Ella Rolierts. 

Q. Wife of Martin Roberts? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Live at Boley? — A. Live out about 1 mile from Boley. Have moved near 
Castle. Got a letter from her last week. 

Q. Did you take Hugh along with you? Does Hugh live at Depew? — A. No, 
sir. Hugh lives out from Castle. 

Q. Did you take Hugh along with you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Take liirdie?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q, Birdie live at Depew? — A. Yes, sir; lives with me. 

Q. Birdie; a boy or girl? — A. A girl. 

Q. Did each of these children take money along with them? — A. No, sir. 

Q. They didn't give any money? — A. I got the money myself. 



336 INDIAX APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Q. Hud ho told yoii that yuii would have to hrluj: some more money? — A. 
)K10 more; $17.50 l!.r me. 

Q. Did y(m take liim that $10? You gave him that $10?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How much more? — A. $.^ apiece for the children. 

Q. How much in all?— A. $25. 

Q. (iave him $2.3 for the children? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. They paid you the money to give to him? — A. All hut one. That was 
Birdie. She was living with me and I pay hers. 

Q. How much did this make in all that you paid Durant?— A. $10, $17.50, 
and $2.3. Let's see — $42.50 in all. Would be $42.50 near as I come to it. 

Q. Did yt)U get any receipt for the money? — A. I got a receipt for myself 
for $17..50. He told me he would send all the receipts of the kids — their 
receipts. 

Q. Do you know whether he did this? — A. No, sir; I don't. 

Q. Did you have any understanding as to whether Mr. Lindley or this man 
Durant were in the Government service? — A. I understood that Mr. Lindley 
was in the Government service. 

Q. AVho told you that Mi". IJndley was in the Government service? — A. He 
told mo himself. He was working for the Government, and he was not allowed 
to charge any fees. If Government knew he charged any fees, he would be 
hoisted from the oflice. 

Q. He told you that himself? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Anyone else present when he told you? — A. I'es, sir; I think, if I make 
no mistake, there was an old man. Nails. 

Q. Alex. Nails? — A. Yea, sir; if I make no mistake, think he was in there at 
the time. 

Q. What did Durant tell ycm? He tell you he was in Government service? — 
A. He said he was attorney looking up the cases like for myself. 

Q. AMiat did he tell you about Lindley? — A. He said he would look up my 
case, and if it was agreement with Mr. Lindley. * * * Whatever ilr. Lind- 
ley said when he looked it up. * * * When lie looked it up he would turn 
it over to Mr. Lindley. 

Q. Do you know whether Mr. Webster Ballinger, of Washington, D. C, was 
connected with that otfice? — A. I heard he was after I went in. 

Q. Did you sign any contract agreeing to pay anyone any more money? — A. 
Not at that time I didn't. 

Q. Did you sign any contract at any other time? — A. I'es, sir; a contract 
several years ago, 'with IMr. Ballinger. 

Q. Several years ago? — A. About eight or nine years ago. 

Q. Not this year? — A. Not as I know of. 

Q. Did you sign a power of attorney to Ballinger, Lindley, or Durant? — A. 
Well, Mr. Lindley told me that jNIr. Ballinger was attorney. 

Q. Did you sign any power of attorney? — A. Well, I don't know, sir. I tell 
you just like it is. I couldn't read and I couldn't tell yon what I signed. Only 
touched that paper there with my liand. 

Q. Henry Goings, Mamie (Joings. Ella Roberts, and Hugh Goings and Birdie 
Goings all signed aflidavits? — A. Yes, sir; they signed. 

Q. On the day that you were in Muskogee upon the occasion of your second 
visit?— -A. Y'es, sir. There, as stated by you. 

Q. Alex. Nails also signed an aHidavit? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Anyone else sign an adidavit for you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. There was an Indian signed an aftidavit for you — Hennyha? — A. Y'es. sir; 
Mr. Hennyha. 

Q. H(^ was too young to know anything about your parents? — A. Y^es, sir; 
too young. 

Q. His name is also Lewis?^A. Y'es. sir. 

Q. The same H. Jj. Lewis signed an affidavit for you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He was 28 years of age? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He wasn't old enough to recognize any of your ancestors? — A. Not of 
mine, but he did of my children. 

Q. As a matter of fact, you had never seen Alex. Nail before that visit? — 
A. Y^es. sir. 

Q. Where? — A. Fort Towson, Antlers. 

Q. When did you meet him?— A. Several years ago. Thirty years ago. Never 
since I come up here. 



INDIAN APPKOPRIATION BILL. 337 

Q. Never until you caine up here? You didn't know him in old Shuwnee- 
town? — A. Yes, sir. I knew him after I come up to IMuskogee. iVIr. Lindley 
said you will have to get a man who knows your family. 

Q. What did Alex. Nail charge for making an affidavit for you?— A. $5. 

(}. You paid that independent of the other money you paid to Durant?— 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You gave $5 to Alex. Nail?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Hand it to Alex. Nail?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Any of your children pay him anytliing besides? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You never paid Lindley any money? — A. No, sir. 

Q. He knew that you paid Durant this money? — A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Did you i)ay this man Lewis any money? — A. Gave him a dollar. I don't 
know what * * * T didn't know what I had to do; they asked for it. 

Q. Has thi^ 'nan Gouhl been in the employ of these people since? — A. I don't 
know. 

Q. AVhat is your understanding? — A. I don't know. He has been going from 
home. 

Q. Did he tell you Ne was working for them? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you — did (.ould tell you that these persons were in the Government 
service? — A. He told me that Mr. Lindley was. 

Q. Has lie been sending any applicants up to Muskogee from around Depew 
and Bristow?— A. He sent three applications by me. He paid the money for 
three— $3. 

Q. Who wore they? — A. Henry Phillips. Two more were there; I can't 
hardly place tlie names. Henry Phillips the name of one. I knows him well. 

Q. Where dors he live — A. At Depew. 

Q. In town?- -.v. Yes, sir. He was applicant as freedman. 

Q. What nati'>n? — A. Choctaw. 

Q. You went lo IMuskogee with him? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he pay TJndley anything? — A. I don't know, sir. 

Q. Did he tell you he' paid anything? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he pay Durant anything? — A. No. sir; Durant wasn't there. 

Q. Who was acting in Durant's stead? — A. Billy Vann. 

Q. Did he pay Billy Vann anything?— A. I don't know, sir. 

Q. Vann is a big negro? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. With a reel foot? — A. Light-colored negi'o. 

Q. You don't know whether Phillips paid Vann anything or not? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he tell you that he paid anything? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he tell you anything about the nature of the work they were doing 
down there?— A. Billy? 

Q. Yes.^ — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he say whether he was in the Government service himself? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know anything about the work that Vann has been doing around 
here? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You say you don't remember the names of these other persons who went 
to Muskogee? — No, sir. 

Q. They live at Depew? — A. Yes, sir. Yes; I do remember one. It was 
Hickman; something like that. 

Q. Indian, white, or negro? — A. Claimed Indian. 

Q. Colored blood, too? — A. Looked lil<e he had negro blood. 

Q. Know any other name? — A. Hickman all I know. 

Q. Did he pay any money? — A. I don't know, sir. 

Q. Live in town of Depew? — A. Northwest of Depew, a mile and a quarter. 

(Witness excused.) 

State of OKL.\no>rA, county of Tulsa, ss: 

Mildred W. Kelsey, being first duly sworn, states that as stenographer to the 
national attorney for the Choctaw Nation she reported the proceedings in the 
above-entitled case on the 10th day of November, 1915, and that the foregoing is 
a true and correct transcript of her stenographic notes thereof. 

MiLDKEi) W. Kei.se i". 

Suh.scribed and sworn to before me this 7th day of December, 1915. 

[seal I. Fauuar Smith, Notarn Public. 

My eonuni.ssion expires September 9, 191S. 

31362—16 22 



338 INDIAN APPKOPEIATION BILL. 

ENROLLMENT CASE NO. 3. 

Petition of Jackson Barrett and Others for Enrollment as Citizens by 
Blood of the Choctaw Nation, Presented by Webster Ballingek, an 
Attorney at Law. 

reply and argument of p. j. hurley, attorney for the choctaw nation. 

petition of jackson barrett for the enrollment of himself and family ar 
choctaw indians by blood. 

Comes now Jacksou Barrett and shows that he is 51 years of age and that he 
lives at Haskell, Okla. 

That he is a Choctaw Indian hy hirth, by blood, by residence, and by recogni- 
tion ; that his father was Toliver Barrett, a noncitizen, and that his mother was 
Frances Barrett, a half-blood Choctaw Indian. 

That he was born and raised in the Choctaw Nation, near Boswell, and while 
he was still a minor was taken to the State of Texas, where he stayed about 
thi'ee years or a little longer ; was married and came back to the Choctaw 
Nation ; that at another time he went to Texas and stayed for about one year, 
but for the last past 22 years he has not been out of the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Nation until 3 months ago he moved to Haskell, Okla. 

That 11th day of February, 1SS6, he was duly and lawfully married to 
Martha Barrett, with whom he still lives ; that there was born to this union 
the following-named children, to wit : 

Clyde Boyd, nee Hill, age 29 years; Joella Acrey, age 26 years; Henry Bar- 
rett, age 25 years ; Arlington Barrett, age 23 years ; Walter Barrett, age 22 
years ; Francis Grayson, age 20 years ; Donald Barrett, age 17 years ; Idee Bar- 
rett, age 15 years ; Bulah Barrett, age 13 years ; Justice Barrett, age 11 years ; 
child of Clvde Boyd, nge Hill, grandchild of applicant ; Claud Hill, born Novem- 
ber 4, 1903. 

That all of the above-named children except the three older ones were born 
in the Choctaw Nation and have always lived in the Choctaw Nation; that these' 
not born in the Chocta\\' Nation were brought to it in infancy and until three 
months ago have always made it their homes. 

That the I'cason that their names are not on the approved roll as Choctaw 
Indians is tl^at they employed counsel and paid him and he neglected to file any 
application for them, but always represented that the case woidd come up in due 
course of time, as is shown by the letters hereto attached ; that this continued 
until the roll closed and they could not make application because they were not 
full bloods. 

That his said mother died prior to final enrollment, but that her uncle, 
Clayton Hunter, is a duly enrolled Choctaw Indian No. 9374 (Len Paisley). 

Petitioner further shows that lie and his family have always been recognized 
as Choctaw citizens; that none of them have ever been called on to pay per- 
mits, and that he built himself a home on the public domain near Oberlain, 
Okla., and lived there on it unmolested until it was allotted from him. 

Wherefore, petitioner prays that his name, .Jackson Barrett, and the name of 
his wife, IMartha Barrett; also the names of his said children, Clyde Boyd, and 
her son, Claud Doyl ; also his oilier named children : .Toella Acrey, Henry, 
Arlington, and Walter Barrett and Francis Grayson, Donald, Idee, Bulah, and 
.Justice Barrett; and that to them and to each of them be given their dis- 
tributive share of the common property of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians, the 
same as is given to all other resident Choctaws so enrolled. 

.LvcKSON Barrett (His thunib print.) 

The name of .Tackson Barrett was written by me at his request and in his 
presence, and mark made by him in my presence. 

Julius Golden. 

State of Oklahoma, 

Muskogee Count i/, ss: 
Jackson Barrett, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is the above 
named Jackson Barrett; that he has had read over to him tlie above and fore- 



INDIAN" APPKOPEIATIOISr BILL. 339 

solnir petition; nnd tli.-U lu> knows tlio contents tliereof and that the matters 
and things therein contained are true. 

Jackson Barrett (His thumb print.) 

The name of Jackson Barrett was written by me at his request and in his 
presence, and mark made by him in my presence. 

JUT.IUS Golden. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 20th day of February, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over tlie above petition to affiant, and tliat he knew 
the contents thereof and stated that same was true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, Notary Public. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



supplemental petition of CLYDE DOYD, IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF JACKSON 
BARNETT FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Comes now Clyde Boyd, nge Hill, and shows that she is 29 years of age and 
tiiat she lives at present at 3012 Cherry Street, Kansas City, Mo., where she 
was taken by her present husband two years ago the 12th of last January. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian by blood, by residence, and by recognition, as is 
shown by the petition of Jackson Barnett, her father, made in her behalf, to 
which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That she has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof, and 
that the matters and things therein contained with reference to rehitionship 
and residence and the relationship and residence of all the other parties named 
therein she knows to be true of her own knowledge ; that the matters and 
things therein contained with reference to the ancestors of her said father and 
motlier she has always been taught were true; that she has also been told that 
they were true by reliable persons that were personally acquainted with the 
parties and knew the facts, and that she believes them to be true and so charges 
the fact to be. 

That she further knows that she and all the family were all recognized 
Choctaw citizens ever since she could remember and lived with their said 
father in his home on the pulilic domain, which he and the boys put in and on 
wliich he lived until it was allotted from him. 

That on the 8th day of January, 1903, she was duly and lawfully married to 
Monroe Hill, deceased, who was also a Choctaw Indian, and who always said 
tliat he would be enrolled and liave his child enrolled, but he died ; I, however, 
depended on tlie application that my father Iiad made, or thouglit that he had 
made, through the lawyers he had employed as shown by liis said petition. 

That her said name appears in the said petition of her said father at her 
request, and that she hereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in the 
prayer thereto appended. 

Tliat on the 18th day of October, 1912, she was dvdy and lawfully married to 
James Boyd, with whom she still lives. 

Clyde Boyd. 
State of Oklahoma, Mvslcogec Count)/, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 20th day of February, 191G; I 
furtlier certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant and that she 
stated that slie was the identical person named therein and that same was 
true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Puhlic. 

My commission expires .Time 2, 1917. 



SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION OF .lOELLA ACREY, IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF .lACK- 
SON BARNETT FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Comes now .Toella Acrey and shows that she is 2G years of age and that slie 
lives 2 miles south from Muskogee, Okla., where she has lived for the last past 
niontlL That prior to that time her husl)and took her to Texas \vhere they lived 
for one year, and all the rest of her life she has lived in the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nation. 



340 INDIAX APPEOPRTATION BILL. 

Tliat she is a Choctaw Indian by blood, by residence, and by recognition, as is 
sliown by the petition of Jaclvson Barnett, lier fatlier, made in lier beluilf, to 
which this petition is attached and made a part. 

Tliat slie has read over said petition and Ivnows the contents tliereof, and that 
tlie matters and things tlierein contained with reference to lier relationship and 
residence and the relationship and residence of all the other parties named 
therein she knows to be true of her own knowledge ; that the matters and things 
therein contained with reference to the ancestors of her said father and mother 
she has always been taught were true; that she has also been told that they 
were true by reliable persons that were personally acquainted with the parties 
and knew the facts, and that she believes them to be true and so charges the 
facts to be. • 

That she has been a recognized Choctaw citizen ever since she could remem- 
ber as she grew up in the Choctaw Nation. 

That on the 21st day of February, 1908, she was duly and lawfully married 
to Willie Acrey, with whom she still lives. 

That she was compelled to depend on her parents for her enrollment dur- 
ing her minority, which was never done; that the roll was closed before she 
reached her majority ; and although she was of sufllcient age to have been en- 
rolled and allotted, she has been omitted by her tribe and all other parties in- 
terested in her during her minority, and thus deprived of her share of the com- 
mon property of her said tribe of Indians solely on account of her minority. 

That her name appears in the said petition of her said father and that she 
hei'eby ratilies and confirms the same and joins in the prayer thereto appended. 

JoELLA Acrey. 
State of Oklahoma, 

Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 20th day of February, 1915; I 
further certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant and that she 
stated that she was the identical person named therein and that the same was 
true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



supplemental petition of henry barnett in support of the petition of jack- 
son BARNETT FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL AS CHOCTAW INDIANS BY 
BLOOD. 

Comes now Henry Barrett and shows that he is 25 years of age and that he 
lives at Hugo, Okla. 

That he is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, and by recogni- 
tion, as is shown by the petition of Jackson Barnett, his father, made in his 
behalf, to which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That he has read over said petition and knows the contents thei'eof, and that 
the matters and things therein contained with reference to her relationship and 
residence, and the relationship and residence he knows to be true of his own 
knowledge; that the matters and things therein contained with reference to 
the ancestors of his said father and mother he has always been taught were 
true; that he has also been told that they were true by reliable persons that were 
well accpiainted with the parties and knew the facts; and that he believes them 
to be true and so charges the fact to be. 

That he has been a recognized Choctaw citizen ever since he could remember, 
as he grew up in the Choctaw Nation on the home on the public domain that he 
helped his father to put in. 

That during all the enrolling period of the Choctaw Nation since he was born 
he was a minor; that no one, not even his tribe or the United States, his sup- 
posed guardian, looked after his enrollment, although he was old enough to 
have been enrolled and allotted ; that before he reached his majority the rolls 
were closed by law, and he has thus been deprived of his share of the common 
property of his tribe, and solely on account of his minority. 

That his name appears in the said petition of his father at his requesit, and 
that he hereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in the prayer thereto 
appended. 

Henry Barrett. 



INDIAN APPEOPKIATION BILL. 341 

State of Oklahoma, Muskogee Co., ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this tlie 20tli day of February, 1915. I 
further certify tliat I read over tlie above petition to the affiant, and that he 
stated that he was the identical person named therein, and that the same was 
true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, Notary Fuhlic. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



supplemental petition of ARLINGTON BARRETT IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF 
JACKSON BARNETT FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW INDIANS 
BY BLOOD. 

Comes now Arlington Barrett and shows that he is 23 years of age, and that 
he lives at Haskell, Okla., where he has lived for the last past three months 
and to which place he moved from the Chickasaw Nation. 

That he is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, and 
recognition, as is shown by the petition of Jackson liarrett, his father, made in 
his behalf, to which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That he has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof, and 
that the matters and things therein contained with reference to his relation- 
ship and residence and the relationship and residence of all of the other parties 
named therein, he knows to be true of his own knowledge ; that the matters 
and things therein contained with reference to the ancestors of liis said father 
and mother, he has always been taught were true; that he has also been told 
that they were true by reliable persons that were well acquainted with the 
parties and knew the facts, and that he believes them to be true, and so cliarges 
the fact to be. 

That he has been a recognized Choctaw citizen ever since he could remember, 
as he was born and raised in the Clioctaw and Chickasaw Nations. That he 
lived with his said father and helped him to clear up a home on the public 
domain where they all lived without molestation until after allotment. 

That his name should appear on the approved roll as a Choctaw l)y blood, 
and the only reason that he knows that it does not is that he was a minor dur- 
ing all the years of enrollment since he was born and that the rolls were closed 
by operation of law against him during his minority ; that the tribci nor llie 
United States, the supposed guardian of the Choctaws, looked after liim and 
neither did his parents, and on account of his minority he is deprived of his 
birthriglit. 

That his name appears in the said petition of his father at his request and 
that lie hereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in the prayer thereto 
jippended. 

Ar.LiNGTON Barrett. 

State of Oklahoma, Muskogee Count g, ss: 

Arlington Barrett, being first duly sworn on oath, states: That he is the 
above-named Arlington Barrett; that lie has read over the above and foregoing 
petition and that he knows the contents thereof, and that the matters and things 
therein contained are true. 

Arlington Barrett. 

Suliscribed and sworn to before me this the 20th day ,of February, 191"). I 
further certify that I read over and fully explained the above petition to the 
affiant and that he knew the contents thereof and that he stated that same was 
true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

yiy connnisslon expires .lune 2, 191'^ 



supplemental petition of WALTER BARRETT IN SUPPORT OF THE PP^TITION OF JACK- 
SON BARRETT FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW INDIANS BY 
BLOOD. 

Comes now Walter Barrett and shows that lie is 22 years of age and that he 
liv(>s at Haskel, where he moved from the Chickjisaw Nation two months ago. 

That he is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, l)y descent, by residence, and 
by recognition, as is .shown by the petition of Jackson Barrett, his father, 
made in his behalf, to which this petition is attaclied and made a part. 



342 INDIAN APPEOPKIATION BILL. 

That he has read over said petition and Icnows the contents thereof, and that 
the matters and tilings therein contained witli reference to his relationsliip and 
residence and tlie relationsliip and residence of all the other parties named 
tlierein lie laiows to be true of his own knowledge ; that the matters and things 
therein contained with reference to the ancestors of his said father and mother 
lie has always been taught were true; that he has also been told that they were 
true by reliable persons that were well acquainted with the parties and knew 
the facts ; and that he believes them to be true and so charges the fact to be. 

That lie has been a recognized Choctaw citizen ever since he could remember, 
as he was born and raised up in the Choctaw Nation. 

That he was a minor during all the years of enrollment since he was born, 
i'nd that the roll was closed by law before he reached his majority and left him 
off, although he was of sufficient age to have been enrolled and allotted ; thus 
he was deprived of his share of the common property of his tribe for the sole 
reason that he was a minor. 

That his name appears in the said petition of his said father at his request, 
and that he hereby ratifies and confirms the same, and joins in the prayer thereto 
appended. 

Walter Baruett. 

State of Oklahoma, Muskoyce County, us: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 20th day of February, 1915; I 
further certify that I read over the above and foregoing petition to the affiant 
and that he stated that he was the identical party named therein and that the 
same was true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, Notary Public. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



supplemental petition of FRANCIS GRAYSON, IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF 
JACKSON BARNETT FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW INDIANS 
BY BLOOD. 

Comes now Francis Grayson and shows that she is 20 years of age and that 
she lives at Hugo, Okla. 

That she is a Chocktaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, and 
by recognition; as is shown by the petition of Jackson Barnett, her father, made 
in her behalf, to which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That she has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof and that 
the matters and things therein contained with reference to her relationship and 
residence and the relationship and residence of all the other parties named 
therein, she knows to be true of her own knowledge; that the matters and 
thing therein contained with reference to the ancestors of her said father and 
mother, she has always been taught were true, and that she has also been told 
thiit they were true by reliable parties that were personally acquainted with 
the parties and knew the facts, and that she believes them to be true, and so 
charges the facts to be. 

That she has been a recognized Choctaw citizen ever since she could remem- 
ber, having been born and raised in the Choctaw Nation; that she lived with 
her said father on the public domain until same was allotted from him. 

That the reason that she was not enrolled and allotted is that she was a 
minor during all the enrolling years since she was born and that no one looked 
after her interests, and that long before she reached her majority, the rolls were 
closed against her, although she was old enough to have been enrolled and al- 
lotted. 

That her name appears in the said petition of her father with her consent 
and that she hereby ratifies aud confirms the same and joins in the prayer 
thereto appended. 

Francis Grayson. 
State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 29th day of February, 1915; I 
further certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant and that she 
knew the contents thereof and that she stated that she was the identical person 
named therein and that the same was true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, Notary Public. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 343 

AFIADAVIT OF ALEX NAIL IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF JACKSON BARRETT ET AL., 

AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Alex Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of ase, 
and that he lives at lOOG South Third Street, Muskoireo, Okia. 

That he knows the applicant and that he was well and ix-rsonally acquainted 
with his mother, Frances Barrett; her father, old Billy Hunter; they were all 
full-blood Choctaws. 

I also knew her brothers; one was named Silas Hunter, and the other one 
was Thomas Hunter, who run for governor at the last election for chief of the 
Choctaw Nation. I think the oldest one was Nelson. 

When I am at home I live in Atoka County, but am staying at Muskogee for 
the present. 

I have met all the older children of the applicant, but I could not positively 
identify them if they were away from home. I do know that he has a large 
family and that they grew up in the southern part of the Choctaw Nation. 

Alex Nail (his thumb print). 

The name of Alex Nail was written by ine at his request and in his presence 
and mark made by him in my presence. 

Julius Golden, 
Witness to Mark. 
State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 20th day of February, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over and fully explained the contents of the above 
affidavit to the afliant, and that he knew the contents thereof, and that he stated 
that same was true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 
My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



affidavit of W. M. JAMES IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF JACKSON BARRETT 
FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS BY 
BLOOD. 

That lie is well and personally acquainted with the applicant ; that he llrst 
knew him at Boswell, Okla., about 20 years ago. 

That he has always known that his mother was one of the Hunter family, 
and that he was well and personally acquainted with her brothers, Thomas 
Hunter, Silas Hunter, and the oldest one that died long tinu; ago. Nelson 
Hunter ; that were all Choctaw Indians, and that the said Thomas Hunter 
run for governor at the last election that the Choctaws had. 

That the ai)pllcant is now living at Haskell, Okla., where he moved a short 
time ago; that prior to that time I knew him in the Chickasaw Nation and 
first and most in the Choctaw Nation. 

Affiant further stated that the applicant went to Texas and stayed for a 
while, but this was after 1900; that wherever I have known him he has always 
been recognized as a descendant of the Hunter family, his mother having 
been the sister of the above-named Hunters, and as a Choctaw citizen. 

W. M. James (his thumb print). 
State of Oklahoma, 

Muskofice County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the l.'^th day of March, ]01.">; I 
further certify that I read over the above and foregoing allidavlt to the affiant, 
and Miat he knew the contents thereof, and that he stated that same was true, 
and that he was the identical person named therein as alllant. 

[seal.] .Fulius (Joi.den, Notari/ I'iil)lic. 

My conuni.ssion expires June 2. 1917. 



344 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

STATF-MEMT OF P. J. HUET.EY, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHOCTAW NATION. 

Ill re applicntion of Jackson Barrett, for enroUuient of himself, and others, as 
citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

The foregoing petition was served upon nie by Mr. Webster Ballinger, an 
attorney at law, of Washington, D. C, aslving for the enrollment of Jackson 
Barrett, and otliers, as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. The petition 
and accompanying affidavits are attached hereto, and precedes this statement. 

The applicants admit that they are not residents of tlie Clioctaw Nation. No 
effort is made l\v them to show that they ever made application for enrollment 
during the time the rolls were being made. The records of the Indian Office 
do not show that applications were made by or for any of the applicants within 
the time required by law. 

Section 34 of the supplemental agreement between the United States and the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw people, approved by act of Congress July 1, 1902 (32 
Stat., 641), provides as follows: 

"* * * The application of no person whomsoever for enrollment shall be 
received after the expiration of said ninety days." 

The 90 days referred to are 90 days after the ratification of the agreement by 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw people. The agreement was ratified September 25, 
1902. 

Tliey do not show that they were bona fide residents of the Choctaw Nation 
on the 28th day of June, 1898. The law enacted on that date provides as 
follows : 

" No person shall be enrolled who has not heretofore removed to, and in 
good faith settled in the nation in which he claims citizenship." (32 Stat., 641.) 

It will be noted from the petition that the applicant claims that his mother 
died prior to final enrollment ; that her uncle, Clayton Hunter, is a duly en- 
rolled member of the Choctaw tribe of Indians, anil that liis name api)ears 
opposite roll No. 9374. An examination of the approved rolls shows that the 
name of Lou Pusley appears opposite roll No. 9374. There is, however, a Clay- 
ton W. Hunter enrolled as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation opposite 
roll No. 9378, and according to said rolls he is at the present time about 24 
years of age. If he is the uncle of the mother of Jackson Barrett, he has a great 
grand nephew older than himself, which may be possible but is very improbable. 

The statement of the applicants in regard to their relationship to Clayton 
Hunter is so in conflict with the records that it should be disregarded en- 
tirely, but the attorneys for these petitioners procured affidavits from wit- 
nesses, by which affidavits they attempt to corrol)orate the fabrications regard- 
ing the relationsliip, which is set up in the petition. 

Attached to the applicant's petition is an affidavit, signed by mark, of Alec 
Nail, who serves as a professional witness for IMr. Ballinger, and his associates, 
in enrollment matters. Alec Nail is a negro. His affidavit in support of the 
applicant's petition in this case is as follows : 

AFFIDAVIT OF AI,EC NAIL IN SUPPORT OF THE PETl'JION OF JACKSON BARRETT ET AL. 

AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age 
and that he lives at 1006 South Third Street, IMuskogee, Okla. 

That he knows the applicant and that lie was well and personally acquainted 
>vith his mother, Frances Barrett ; her father, old Billy Hunter ; they were all 
full-blood Choctaws. 

I also knew her brothers ; one was named Silas Hunter and the other one was 
Thomas Hunter, who run for .governor at the last election for chief of the 
Choctaw Nation ; I think the oldest one was Nelson. 

^^'hen I am at home I live in Atoka County, but am staying at Muskogee for 
the present. 

I have met all the older children of the applicant, but I could not positively 
identify them if they were away from home. I do know that he has a large 
family and that they grew up in the southern part of the Choctaw Nation. 

(Signed) Alec Nail (by mark). 

State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscrilied and sworn to before me this the 20th day of February, lOl.'i. I 
further certify that I read over and fully explained the contents of the above 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 345 

afRflnvit to the affiant and that he knew the contents thereof, and that he 
stated that same was true. 

[seal.] .Tulixts Golden, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 

On the 31st day of July, 191.5, Alec Nail was called upon to testify in rei^ard 
to his knowled.ffe of the facts in the ahove-entitled case before INIr. W. L. Bowie, 
an official of the Interior Department, and, after being first duly sworn, testi- 
fied as follows : 

Q. Did you make affidavit for Jackson Barrett for use in his application for 
enrollment? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you Ivnow Jackson Barrett before you met him in Ballinser's oflice a 
short time acio? — -A. Never seen him before. 

Q. You told me you made an affidavit for Jackson Barrett in Ballinger's 
office. — A. Ye?-', sir ; I swore I Icnew the Hunter family. 

Q. That you knew the Hunter family? — A. Yes, sir; old Ben Hunter. This 
man claims tliat Ben Hunter's daughter was his mother. I didn't know her, but 
I knew Tommy and Charlie. 

Q. Who did you say Jackson Barrett is? — A. He looks like a white man. 

Q. Did he have any indications of negro blood? — A. No, sir; he is just a 
dark, red-headed white man. 

Q. Does he claim to be a negro? — A. No, sir; Choctaw. He claims to be old 
Bennie Hunter's grandson. 

Q. Does he associate with negroes? — A. I do not know. He does not stay 
around here. 

Q. You say you never knew him until you met him in Muskogee a short time 
ago? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you know his mother? — A. No, sir; I don't know his mother. This 
Choctaw woman misiht have been his mother as far as I know. 

Q. You know nothing about it only what he claims? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know her name? — A. No, sir; it was Beckie, I think lie said. 

Q. Who did he claim was his father? — A. Well, his father must have been a 
white man as there was nothing said about him. 

Q. Did you ever know a person named Billie Hunter? — A. That is the old 
man. 

Q. Is he tlie person you called Benny Hunter? — A. Yes, sir; that is Billie 
Hunter. Yes, sir ; Billie Hunter ; but the Choctaws called him Benny Hunter. 

Q. He is the person you thought was meant when Benny Hunter was men- 
tioned. You mean Billy Hunter? — A. Yes, sir; and there was Silas and Tom 
Hunter. 

Q. Who was Tom Hunter? Where does he live? Is he the person who was 
candidate for governor?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Does he live at Hugo? — A. About Hugo, I guess. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Tolliver Barrett? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not Ivnow wbetlier Tolliver was the father of Jackson Barrett? — A. 
No, sir; I don't. I don't know that at all. 

Q. Did you know Clayton Hunter? — A. I knew a Charlie Hunter ; there might 
have been a Clayton. 

It needs no discussion to show the conflicts between the testimony of Alec 
Nail and his affidavit filed in support of the applicant's petition. 

W. M. James, another professional witness used by INIr. Ballinger and his 
associates, made an affidavit in sujiport of the applicant's petition. When 
called upon to testify in regard to the facts set forth in the affidavit he testified 
as follows: 

Q. Are you acquainted with one Jackson Barrett? — A. No, sir; I am not 
acquainted with .Jackson Barrett. 

Q. You say that you are not acquainted with Jackson Barrett? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever live at Boswell? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Never did reside there? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever been in Boswell?^— A. I have. 

Q. Every stay there any length of time? — A. No, sir; I used to go to Boswell 
while running over the country in the early days buying cattle for cattlemen. 

Q. Are you acquainted with Thomas Hunter? — A. No, sir. 

Q. With Silas Hunter?— A. No, sir. 



346 INDIAN APPKOPEIATION BILL. 

Q. With Nelson Hunter? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you ever acquainted with Toliver Barrett? — A. No, sir. 

Q. With Francis Hunter? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever Icnow Billy Hunter? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You never knew any of the Choctaws? — A. No, sir; was not very well 
acquainted with thein. 

Q. Did you know any of the Choctaw freedmen? — A. No, sir; none of the 
(]hoctaws and Chiclvasaws ; but I knew the Creeks and Cherokees. I drove 
a mail hack all through here. 

Q. I will read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you and 
bearing your thumb print, acknowledged to before Julius Golden, notary public 
of Muskogee County, Okla., under date of March 13, 1915 ; filed by Mr. Webster 
Ballinger with the ai)plication for the enrollment of Jackson Barrett et al., 
as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation, which is as follows : 

" That he is well and personally acquainted with the applicant ; that he first 
knew him at Boswell, Okla., about 20 years ago. 

"Th;it lie has always known that his mother was one of the Hunter family, 
and that he was well and personally acquainted with her brothers, Thomas 
Hunter, Silas Hunter, and the oldest one that died long time ago, Nelson 
Hunter; that were all Choctaw Indians and that the said Thomas Hunter run 
for governor at the last election that the Choctaws had. 

"That the applicant is now living at Haskell. Okla., where he moved a short 
time ago; that prior to that time I knew him in the Chicasaw Nation and first 
and most in the Choctaw Nation. 

"Affiant further states that the applicant went to Texas and stayed for a 
while, but this was after 1900; that wherever I have known him he has always 
been recognized as a descendant of the Hunter family, his mother having been 
the sister of the above Hunters, and as a' Choctaw citizen. 

(Signed.) " W. M. Jamks (by tlmnib mark)." 

Q. Did you make this aflidavitV— A. I don't think T did that * * * for 
a (Choctaw. 

Q. You deny that you ever made such an affidavit? — A. Yes, sir; for a Choc- 
taw. 

Q. You do not know the Jackson Barrett named in this application? — A. No, 
sir; I don't know nothing at all about that, foi' I was not acquainted with that 
Choctaw family at all. 

Q. Yon are not acquainted with that Choctaw family at all? — A. None of the 
Choctaw families at all. 

Q. You do not know any of the membei's of the Hunter family named in this 
petition? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know the applicant or any of his ancestors? — A. No, sir. 

Q. His father, mother, sisters, or brothers? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Are -you acquainted with Julius Golden, who executed this affidavit? — 
A. Yes, sir. 

I had not examined this case to any great extent until I found that the 
Thomas Hunter referred to in the affidavits made by Mr. Ballinger's two pro- 
fessional witnesses in support of his contentions in this case was the Hon. 
Thomas W. Hunter, of Hugo, Okla.. who has for many years been prominent in 
Choctaw politics, and is at the i)resent time a member of the house of repre- 
sentatives of the State of Oklahoma. 

It should be noted that the aflldavits state that the jnother of the applicant, 
Jackson Barrett, was a sister of Thomas AY. Hunter and Silas Hunter and the 
oldest one. Nelson Hunter, who is dead. They also attempt to show that the 
name of the fathei- of Thomas W. Hunter was Billie Hunter. I wrote a letter 
to Hon. Thomas W. Hunter and set forth the facts and asked him to please 
advise me if these aiiplicants were relatives of his: and if so, what relation. 

On July 23, 1915, I received the following letter from Hon. Thomas W. 
Hunter : 

House of Repeesentatives, 

State of OKLAHo>rA. 

FOXTRTH LeOISLATTTRE, 

Hugo, Olda., Juli/ 23, JDlf). 
Hon. Pat J. Hurley, 

Choctaw Xational Attorney, Tiilsa, Olla. 
Dear Pat: I have just read your favor of the 22d instant, inclosing aflldavits 
of Alec. Nail and W. M. James (copies) in support of the ai)plication of Jackson 



INDIAN APPKOPKIATION BILL. 347 

Rnrrett for enrollment of himself :is :i Choctaw Induin. I have read the afli- 
(lavit.s with a areat deal of annisement. They have their cards mixed. In 
fact, this same biuich tried to be enrolled at Tushkahoina many years a?;o upon 
the claim that they were near relatives of myself. Tliat Uilly Hunter was a 
brother to my father. Where they fell down was that my father's real name 
was not Hunter. 

His true name was Bina Ahantubby, and it beini;" hard to pronounce by the 
English-speaking people he was called Bennie Hunter, for short; you notice 
the similarity of the names. I had no sister who was the mother of Jackson 
liarrett. I am 40 years of age and have never heiird of Jackson Barrett. I know 
the bunch that claim to be Choctaws thrcmgh an old man by the name of Billy 
Hunter. I have seen Billy Hunter. About 30 years ago he came to see my 
father and claimed to be a brother, and my father told him in my presence 
that it was not so. Billy and his bunch afterwards came near getting by the 
citizenship conunittee of the Choctaw Council. The conunittee sent for me, and 
got my testimony. They failed of enrollment. ]\Iy father was a full-blood 
Choctaw Indian and could speak but a little English. He had one brother — 
the only one that ever came to the Choctaw Nation from Mississippi with my 
father. His name was Pisachabe, also a full-blood Choctaw. If all other claim- 
ants for citizenship are as fictitious as this one is, they cau't get by. There is 
nothing to the claim of Jackson Barrett, if he depends upon getting by as 
stated. I am very glad that you tnkeu this matter up with me. In case there 
is anything else I can do, I should he pleased to he advised. In the meantime 
I beg to be. as ever. 

Very respectfully, T. W. Hunter. 

After having received this letter and after liaving continued the investigation 
of the case for some time I found that the applicants insisted that Jackson 
liarrett was the son of Francis Hunter, who was a sister of Hon. Thomas W. 
Hunter. As shown by the above letter, Thomas W. Hunter had stated, "I had 
no sister who was the mother of Jackson Barrett." 

I again wrote Mr. Hunter, telling him that while his letter was very definite 
to the effect that Jackson Barrett was not rehited to him, I wanted him to state 
liositively whether lie had ever had a sister named Francis Hunter. On 
November 8, 1915, I received from him the following letter : 

Hugo, Okla., November S, 1915. 
Hon. Pat J. Hurley, 

Attornei) for Choctaws, Mnskogec, Okla. 
Dear ]Mr. Hurley : I have your letter of the 5th instant, making further in- 
ijuiry relative to the application for citizenship by Jackson Barrett on the state- 
ment that he was the son of Frances Biirrett, nee Hunter. I wish to state that 
I have never had a sister by the name of Frances Hunter. I had two half 
sisters — Enice and Agnes— wlio died a great many years ago. I have two mai"- 
ried grown sisters living and one that died in infancy. I had never heard of 
Jackson Barrett until you wrote me some time ago. 
Yours, truly, 

T. W. Hunter. 

These letters, together with the testimony of W. B. James and Alec Nail, the 
professional witnesses used by Mr. Ballinger and his associates in these mat- 
ters, seem to show conclusively that these applicants are not entitled to enroll- 
ment as citizens of the Choctaw Nation ; they are not possessed of Choctaw 
Indian blood; they are imposters. 

If they were possessed of Indian blood, they do not reside in the Choctaw 
Nation and did not make application for enrollment within the time prescribed 
by law. 

I have not attempted to procure the testimony of the applicants, for the reason 
that to do so would consume unnecessary time and cause the Choctaw Nation 
unnecessary expense. 

The examination of the professional witnesses used by Mr. Ballinger and 
his associates, together with the connnunications from Hon. Thomas W. Hunter, 
are sufiicient to show that the statements contained in the petition of the appli- 
cant and th(> allidavils submitted in .'^upitort thereof are false. 

The alleged relationship between these people and the Hunter family does not 
exist. The person through whom they claim relationship to the Hunter family 



348 INDIAN" APPROPRIATION BILL. 

lias never existed. There was no such person as "Francis Hunter," sister of 
Thomas W. Hunter. 

P. J. Hurley, 
National Attorney for the Choctaio Nation, 



CASE NO. 3 B. 

STATEMENT OF P. J. HUELEY, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHOCTAW NATION. 

In re petition of INIary Ross, nee Dunn, nee Fulsom, for enrollment of herself 
and Teddy Dunn, her minor son, as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

Department of the Interior, 
United States Indian Service, 

Five Civilized Tribes, 
Muskogee, Olda., November 3, 1915. 
Postmaster, Haskell, Okla. 

Sir : Desiring to personally interview Mary Ross, said to be the wife of one 
Linnon Ross, in an official matter, I would thank you to promptly inform me, 
by indorsement hereon and under cover of the inclosed envelope, whether 
she resides within the delivery of your office ; and, if so, whether in town or at 
what distance and in what direction in the country. If she does not reside 
within your delivery, any information you may furnish with respect to present 
post-office address and nearest town or railway station will be appreciated. 
Very respectfully, 

Wm. L. Bowie, 
Of Special Investigation Service, 
Office of Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes. 

Mary Ross lives in the town of Haskell, Okla. She can be found most any 
time. She runs a restaurant there. Is this person white, Indian, or colored? 
Negro. 

T. J. Way, 
Postmaster Haskell, Okla. 



I'Etition of urARY ROSS, nee dun, nee fulsom, for the enkollmext of herself 

AND child AS CHOCTAW INDIANS BY HLOOD. 

Comes Mary Ross, nee Dun, nee Fulsom, and shows: That she is 29 years 
of age and that she lives at Haskell, Okla. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence; 
that she is the daughter of William Fulsom, who died many years ago, and 
who was a Choctaw Indian and was sometimes called a full blood, but I was 
always informed that he had some white blood in him. 

That her mother was Fannie Fulsom, who also died prior to final enroll- 
ment; that she died the year that old Oklahoma was opened, 1889; that she 
was a three-quarters Choctaw Indian. , 

That applicant was born and grew to be a good-sixed girl near Atoka, then 
her mother took her to Oklahoma City, where she died: that applicant lived 
in Oklahoma City then five years and has since lived either in the Chickasaw 
or Clioctaw Nation, and this has been the last past 19 years. 

That on the (3th day of July, 1900, she was duly and lawfully married to Ed 
Dun, deceased ; that there was born to this union one child, Teddy Dun, born 
July' 6. 1905, and is still living and lives with applicant at above-stated place 
of residence. „ ,, 

That on the 2Gth day of September, 1909, she was duly and lawfully married 
to Lennon Ross, a noncitizen. 

That she has lived at Haskell for the last past two years ; that prior to that 
time I was at Durant, at Caddo, and different i)lac('s, and was out at different 
periods following my profession at different places, but never for more than 
six months at any one time. ^, . , 

That during years 1890-1899 she was most of the time in Ada, hi the Chicka- 
saw Nation; the rest of the time she was in Stringtown and other places, 
wherever she could get the best wages, being a single girl till 1900. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 349 

That the reason that I have never heen enrolled was that dnring the enrolling^ 
period she was a minor and an orphan ; that the roll was closed when she 
first became of ase, and she went to Ballenger and Lee, attorneys, at Ardmore, 
and was informed that the roll was closed. 

Wherefore petitioner prays that her name and the name of her said child, 
Teddy Dun, her present name being Mary Ross, be placed on the roll of Choc- 
taw Indians by blood, and that to them and to each of them be given their 
distributive share of the common property of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians 
the same as is given to all other such Indians so enrolled. 

Emmer.son Fulsom. Dr. Fulsom, Julius Fulsoin, et al., are the brothei'S of my 
father ; are all enrolled. 

Mary Ross. 
State of Oklahoma. Muscogee Cotinty, ss. 

]Mary Ross, being first duly sworn, on oath states that she is the above- 
nnmed ^lary Ross; that she has read over the above and foregoing petition and 
knows the contents thereof; and that the matters and things therein contained 
are true. 

Mary Ross. 

Snbscribed'and sworn to before me this the 9th day of March, 1915. I further 
certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant, and that she knew 
the contents thereof, and that she stated that same was rue. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Puhlic. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



AFFIDAVIT OF W. M. JAMES IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF MARY ROSS FOR THE 
ENROLLLMENT of herself AND CHILD AS A CHOCTAW INDIAN BY BLOOD. 

W. M. James, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 70 years of age 
and that he lives at Beeland. Okla. 

That he knows the applicant and knows where she was born; and that he has 
been to the house and eat there with them — this was near where Atoka is now; 
affiant further states that he knew her until her mother took her away to 
Oklahoma City — that was after her father died and when she was a girl ; I 
also knew her father, William Fulsom, and was well acquainted also with his 
brother Dr. Fulsom. I knew of other brothers that he had, and know that all 
of them were Choctaw Indians and were so considered — and considered as 
full bloods by most of the people. 

Her mother, Fannie Fulsom, lived with her said father, William Fulsom, 
until he died. 

I bought cattle from both William Fulsom and the Dr. Fulsom. 
Affiant further states that he also knew the applicant when she lived in 
Oklahoma City with her said mother; that her mother run a boarding house 
there. 

I have not known her since, until she moved to Haskell, Olvla. 

W. M. James (his thumb i)rint). 
The name W. M. James was written by me at his request and in his presence 
and mark made by him in my presence. 

Julius Golden (Witness to mark). 
State of Oklahoma, 

Muskogee County, ss: 
Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 9th day of March, 191.'); I fur- 
ther certify that I read over and fully explained the contents of the above 
affidavit to the affiant; and that he knew the contents thereof; and that he 
stated that same was true; and that he is the above-named affiant. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, Noiarii Piihlic. 

My connnission expires June 2, 1917. 



affidavit of alec N.ML in SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF MARY BOSS FOR THE 
ENROLLMENT OF HERSELF AND CHILD AS CHOCTAW INDIANS BY BLOOD. 

Alec Nail being fir.st duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age 
and that he lives near Boggy Depot, Okla. 



350 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

That he knows tho applicant, Mary Ross ; her maiden name was Mary Ful- 
som ; she was the (Iaiijj;hter of William Fulsom, who was mostly considered a 
full-blood Choctaw, hut may have had some white blood ; that her mother was 
Fannie Fulsom, and she was a mixed blood, about tliree-foui-ths Choctaw. 

Allinnt further states that he knows where the applicant was born, and that 
it was in old Atoka, near the toll bri(l,a(» on old lady Flax's place ; that she 
livefl there until slie was a good-sized girl, and then her mother took her to 
Oklahoma City. 

I lost track of her, then, for a good many years, and was talking and inquir- 
ing about her last fall to Julius Fulsom, at Atoka ; he stated that her mother 
had died and that she was just left to go it alone, and that she was somewhere, 
and he had also lost her. 

I have been staying in Muskogee for some time and have met her and now 
know that she lives at Haskell, and she tells me that she has lived there for 
the last past two years. 

The other places she has lived she has told me about, and I know the places 
but can't say how long she lived at any of them, only what she tells me. 

I know nothing of her child, only what slie tells me. 

Affiant further states that he was well and personally acquainted with the 
Fulsom family, to which the father of the applicant belonged, and that said 
father of the applicant had about 7 or 8 brothers and they were all enrolled 
Choctaws that lived long to be enrolled ; that the names of the ones that I 
know best and remember vrere Emerson Fulsom, Dr. Fulsom, Julius Fulsom 
that were finally enrolled. William died a long time ago. 

Alec (his thumb print) Nail.. 

The name of Alec Nail was written by me at his request and in his presence 
and mark made by him in ray presence. 

Julius Golden (witness to name). 
State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 9th day of March, 191 5 ; I further 
certify that I read over the above affidavit to the affiant and that he knew the 
contents thereof and that he stated that the same was true and that he was the 
identical person named as affiant in the above affidavit. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary P.ubUc. 

(My commission expires June 2, 1917.) 



statement of p. J. hurley, attorney for the CHOCTAW NATION. 

In re petition of Mary Ross, nee Dunn, nee Fulsom, for enrollment of herself 
and Teddy Dunn, her minor son, as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

The foregoing petition was served upon me by Webster Ballinger, an attorney 
at law of Washington, D. C. The petitioner, Mary Ross, claims right to enroll- 
ment for herself and her minor son, Teddy Dunn, as citizens by blood of the 
Choctaw Nation. The applicant claims that she is the daughter of William 
Fulsom and that William Fulsom was a brother of Dr. I. W. Fulsom, Julius 
Fulsom, and Emerson Fulsom. The Fulsom family is one of the most promi- 
nent families in the Choctaw Nation. The applicant in this case is a negro. 
The testimony of the applicant was taken on the 23d day of November, 1915. 
A complete copy of her testimony is attached hereto. Attention is called to the 
fact that the applicant does not know whether her father's name was William 
Fulsom or not. She states that her father was killed before she was born; that 
she believes that her mother was married to her father but does not know 
whether slie was or not. The applicant is not a creditable witness. During the 
time she was on the stand in this case she made a mnnber of statements about 
her relatives and tlie places where sb(> liad lived that are entirely at variance 
with each other. From her testimony, however, it apjiears that while she may 
have at one time i-esided at Atoka, in the ('hoctaw Nation, she was not a resident 
of that nation on June 28, 1898, and under the law would therefore be not 
entitled to enrollment, even if the allegations of her petition in regard to her 
Indian blood were correct. The act of Congress approved June 28, 1898, by 
which act the "Atoka agreement" between tlie United States and the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations was approved (30 Stat., 495), provides as follows: 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 351 

" No person shall be enrolled who has not heretofore removed to and in good 
faith settled in the nation in which he claims citizenship." 

Mary Ross did not make application for enrollment within the time required 
by law. The supplemental agreement between the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations and the United States, approved by act of Congress July 1, 1902, pro- 
vides, in part, as follows (32 Stat., G41) : 

" * * * the application of no jierson whomsoever for enrollment shall be 
received after the expiration of the said 90 days * * *." 

The 90 days referred to are 90 days after the ratification of the supple- 
mental agreement. The supplemental agreement was ratified on the 2.5tli day 
of September, 1902. This applicant did not make application for enrollment 
within the required time. The application now before us was executed by 
Mary Ross liefore Julius Golden, a notary public, on the 2d day of March, 1915, 
and in regard to the making of this application, Mary Ross testified as follows : 

Q. Were you led to believe they were enrolling people? — A. I asked, and they 
said they were. 

Q. They were enrolling people? — A. Yes, sir; I asked for Ballinger, and Lee 
was gone, and Ballinger was in Washington, D. C, and they were hired by the 
Interior, but this man that was doing this writing, he told me he was hired and 
was getting a salary to enroll people and this colored man. 

Q. Did this man tell you he was hired by the Secretary of the Interior? — 
A. Yes, sir ; his duty was to enroll applicants. 

Q. Did he tell you whether or not he coiild take any fees for his service? — 
A. He wouldn't take a penny ; was being paid by the Government. 

Q. Who was the colored man? — A. Nelson Durant. That is the man I gave 
the money to. 

Q. What money?— A. The $5. 

Q. How much did he ask for?— A. $2.5. 

Q. What was the reason? — A. He was charging — I asked him how come him 
to charge, and he said, " These witnesses." I wouldn't pay him a cent, so I 
says. I went l)ack and stalled him. I had the money, but I stalled him. T 
said after these witnesses, I know her and says there is no use in paying that 
fellow anything if he won't take the time up with you and find your people. 
Don't you pay him a penny. So I studied and says that might be I am losing out 
and I couldn't speak to the white gentlemen. He wouldn't let me in the little 
room and you go out by the desk and so I talked to him and didn't know what 
to do and I made up my mind if he would take .$5 and promise him the other 
$15 and I never did send the $15 to him. 

I have quoted this part of the testimony only to indicate the nature of the 
institution being conducted by Mr. Ballinger and his associates at Muskogee 
through which these ignorant and gullible negroes are separated from their 
money. I am sure that no one could hear the facts in the case as set forth by 
this applicant and entertain any hope to secure her enrollment as a citizen by 
blood of the Choctaw Nation. Yet this firm of attorneys not only took her pe- 
tition and allowed her to be swindled by a negro in their employment, but also 
procured the affidavits of two negi-oes who have served this firm of attorneys as 
pi'ofessional witnesses. These alTidavits thus .secured were for the purpo.se of 
corroborating the fal.se statements contained in the petition of Mary Ro.ss. 

In the first place. Dr. I. W. Fulsom, Julius Fulsom, and Emerson P'ulsom never 
had a brother by the name of William Fulsom, as stated in the petition of this 
api)li(ant. I am .setting forth in full tlie testimony of William Fulsom, a son of 
Dr. Fulsom. This testimony was taken on November 22, 1915, and is in full as 
follows : 

Q. State your name. — A. AVilliam W. Fulsom. 

Q. Where do you reside? — A. Muskogee, Gkla. 

Q. Are you a member of the Choctaw Tril)e of Indians? — A. I am. 

Q. Where were you born? — A. Atoka, Okla. 

Q. What was your father's name? — A. I. W. Fulsom. 

Q. What was your father's i)rofession? — A. Physician and surgeon. 

Q. Did your father have any brothers? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Name your father's brothers. — A. A. E. Fulsom, Julius Fulsom, F. E. 
Fulsom, and Theodore Fulsom, who died about 25 or 30 years ago. 

Q. Mary Ross, who claims she is 29 years of age and a daughter of William 
Fulsom, states that William Fulsom was a brother of Eni(>rson Fulsom, Dr. 
Fulsom, aiul Julius Fulsom. Do you know whether or not your father had a 
brother named William Fulsoni? — A. He did not; no, sir. 



352 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 

Q. Your father's brother referred to iu your statement as A. E. Fulsom is 
Emerson Fulsom? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Attached to an application made by IMary Itoss for the enrollment of her- 
self and child as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation is a petition made by 
W. M. James. Anions other statements, James alleges, " I also knew her father, 
William Fulsom, and was well acquainted with his brother. Dr. Fulsom. I 
knew the other brothers that he had, and know that all of them were Choctaw 
Intlians and were considered as full-blood among the people." Is that state- 
ment true or untrue V — A. It is untrue. JMy father had no brijther named Wil- 
liam Fulsom, and the statement that they were considered as full-bloods is not 
true. They were considered half-blood Indians, and were in fact. 

Q. The allidavit purporting to have been made by Alec Nail, attached to the 
petition of Mary Koss, and is in part as follows : 

"Alliant further states that he is well and personally acquainted with the 
Fulsom family, to which the father of the applicant belongs, and that the said 
father of the applicant had seven or eight brothers, and that they were all en- 
rolled as Choctaws that lived long enough to be enrolled ; that the names of the 
cues he knows best and remembers were Emerson Fulsom, Dr. Fulsom that 
were Anally enrolled. William died a long time ago." Did your father have 
seven or eight brothers? — A. No, sir; he had only four brothers. 

Q. And those four are the ones you have heretofore named in this testi- 
mony? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Your father had no brother named William? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know anything about the applicant, Mary Koss? — A. No, sir; I 
never heard of her before. 

Q. You were well acquainted with all of the members of your father's 
family"^ — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Your uncles and aunts, except the one who died about the time you were 
born? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How old are you now? — A. I am 38. 

Q. Where did your father reside during his lifetime? — A. He was born near 
Durant, at Old Carriage Point, and he lived at Atoka for many years and then 
moved from Atoka to Oklahoma City, and was there for about three years, and 
then moved to Ardmoi-e, where he lived until he died, three years ago. 

Q, Was there another Dr. Fulsom besides your father? — A. I never heard of 
one. 

Q. You are well acquainted with all of the Fulsoms in the Choctaw Nation? — 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you never heard of a Dr. Fulsom besides your father? — A. No, sir. 

It would be unnecessary for us to go further to show that this claim is fraudu- 
lent, as no such person ever existed as the man whom this negro claimed was 
her father ; but the lirm of attorneys who prepared this case do not hesitate to 
produce allidavits of their professional witnesses to corroborate the false and 
fraudulent statements contained in the petition of the applicant. 

W. M. James, one of Ballinger, Lindley t^ Uodkeyss professional witnesses, 
whose allidavit is attached to many of the petitions which they have submitted 
in citizenship cases, and who is now serving a term in the State penitentiary at 
McAlester, Okla., testilied in this case before an officer of the Interior Depart- 
ment on July 30, 1915, as follows: 

Q. Are you acquainted with Mary Ross? — ^A. Yes, sir; she lives at Haskell. 

Q. Do you know who her father was? — A. No, sir; this is another one of 
Nails ; I don't know anything about her. 

Q. Did you see her down here? — A. Yes, sir; seen her after she made affidavit. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius 
Golden, a'notary public, on March 9, 1915, tiled by Mr. Webster Ballinger with 
the petition of Mary Koss for enrollment of herself and child as Intlians by blood 
of the Choctaw Nation : 

" W. M. James, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 70 years ox 
age and that he lives at Beeland, Okla. 

■' That he knows the applicant and knows where she was born, <ind that he 
has been to the house and eat there with them; this was near where Atoka is 
now ; affiant further states that he knew her until her mother took her away 
to Oklahoma City ; that was after her father died and when she was a girl. 

" I also knew her father, William Fulsom, and was well acquainted also with 
his brother, Dr. Fulsom. 



INDIAN APPKOPRIATION BILL. 353 

" I knew of other brothers th:it he had and know that all of them were 
Choctaw Indians, alid were so considered, and considered as full bloods by most 
of the people. 

" Her mother. Fannie Fnlsdin, lived with her said father, ^^'iHiam Fulson., 
until he died. 

" I bought cattle from both William Fulsom and Dr. Fulsom. 

"Afiiant further states that ho also knew the applicant when she lived in 
Oklahoma City with her said mother. That her mother ran a boarding house 
there. 

" I have not known her since until she moved to Haskell, Okla. 

(Signed) " W. M. James (his thumb mark)." 

Q. What do you know about this affidavit? — A. I bought cattle from those 
people. 

Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. I make this affidavit .just like Nail. I 
know the people who are called there. 

Q. Did Golden read the affidavit to you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You took Alec Nail's statement for all of this?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You do not know her father or mother? — A. No, sir; only those men for 
whom I bought cattle for in the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. You do not know whether she is a Choctow or not? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Alec Nail got you to do this? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you paid anything? — A. No, sir. 

Q. What did Alec promise you? — A. He said they would pay. She said if 
they got through, each would get $2.5. Nail said this, I never spoke to her 
about it at all. 

All of this testimony is entirely in conflict with the statements made by the 
applicant when she testified in this case, as well as in conflict with the allega- 
tions and the affidavit made by William James. It will be noted that William 
James says now that he didn't know the applicant and took the word of Alec 
Nail for all that he swore to ; that he didn't know any of the facts that he swore 
to of his own knowledge, but Alec Nail, who is another one of Ballinger. Lindly, 
and Rodkey's professional ^\•itnesses and is a negro, who signs by mark, was 
called upon to testify in this case before an officer of the Deiiartment of the 
Interior on July 1, 1915, and his testimony is as follows: 

Q. Are you acquainted with Mary Ross? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know a Mary Ross? — A. No, sir. 

I read you an affidavit purporting to have l)een made by you before Julius 
Golden, a notary public, on March 9, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger with 
the petition for the enrollment of Mary Ross and her child as citizens by blood 
of the Choctaw Nation : 

"Alec Nail, being fir.st duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age 
and that he lives near Boggy Depot, Okla. 

"That he knows the applicant, Mary Ross; her maiden name was Mary 
Fulsom; she was the daughter of William Fulsom, who was mostly con- 
sidered a full-blood Choctaw but may have had some white blood ; that her 
mother was Fannie Fulsom and she was a mixed blood, about three-fourths 
Choctaw. 

"Affiant fui'ther states that he knows where the applicant was horn and 
that it was in Old Atoka near the toll bridge on Old Lady Flax's, a place that 
she lived there until she was a good-sized girl and then her mother took her 
to Oklahoma City. 

" I lost track of her then for a good many yeai's and was talking and in- 
quiring about her last fall to Julius Fulsom, at Atoka; he stated that her 
mother died, and that she was .iust left to go it alone ; and that she was some- 
where, and he had also lost her. 

"I have been staying in Muskogee for some time and have met her and new 
know that she lives at Haskell, and she tells me that she lias lived there for 
the last past two years. 

"The other places she has lived she has told nie abont, and T know the 
places but can't say how long she lived at any of them, only what slie fells me. 

" I know nothing of her child, only what slie tells me. 

" Afliant further states that he was and is personally accpiainted with the 
Fulsom family to which the father of th(» applicant belonged, and that the said 
father of the applicant had about seven or eight brothers, and that they were all 

31362—16 23 



354 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

enrolled Choctuws that lived loiif? to be enrolled; tliat the names of the ones 
I know best and remember were Emereson Fulsom, Julius Fulsom, and Dr. 
P^ilsom, that were finally enrolled. William died a Ions time a^o. 

(Signed) "Alec Nail (his thumb mark)." 

Q. Did you make this attidavit? — A. No; not all of that. I know the woman 
that they are talking about that claimed William FuIsoim was her father; that 
is about all I know. 

Q. You made this affidavit that A. She claimed that AVilliam Fulsom was 

her father. I know him, and that is all I know, and what I told them. I 
don't know her. 

Q. You did not know this woman who represented herself to be Mary Ross? — 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Had you ever seen her? — A. Not to my knowledge. 

Q. You knew notliing about her parentage? — A. No, sir; only what she 
claimed. I knew William Fulsom. 

Q. You say that she claimed to be the daughter of William Fulsom? — 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What William Fulsom; wliere did he live? — A. I don't know where he 
lived up to his death. I don't know only where .Tulius is living. 

Q. Did William have any brothers? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Name them. — A. A. Rufus. 

Q. AVhere did he live when you knew him? — A. They lived down on Blue. 

Q. What direction from Durant?— A. East. 

Q. How far from Caddo? — A. Well, I don't know, sir; I don't know exactly 
how far. 

Q. Was William Fulsom married? — A. I don't know that. 

Q. How old a man was he? — A. If he liad lived, lie would -have been as old 
as I am, I reckon. 

Q. When did you know him? — A. In my boyliood days. 

Q. How long has he been dead? — A. I don't know now; I don't know when lie 
died or where he died, or whether he is dead at all. 

Q. Do you Ivuow whether he had any children? — A. I don't know. 

Q. You do not know when he died ? — A. No, sir ; no, sir. 

Q. You say that you do not know whether he was married or not? — A. No, 
sir; I am certain of one thing, and that is if lie was married at all it was not 
to Mary Ross's mother, for Mary is colored. 

Q. What is this woman's color? — A. Just a shade darker than I am. 

Q. Just a shade darker than you are?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You are what they call A. A dark bay. 

Q. What did you get for making this affidavit for Mary Ross?~A. I don't 
know whether $1 or $1.50. 

Q. Was the affidavit read over to you? — A. Everyone that my thumb is on 
was read over. They said they read them over, but from what you said there 
they did not read that. 

Q. Would you have signed an affidavit testifying that you knew this family 
and that you knew her family and mother? — A. No, sir; because I don't know 
the family or the mother, but only the man she claimed was her father; but 
am not positive he was or not. 

r. J. Hurley, 
Attorney for the Choctaw Nation. 



Department of the Interior, 
Office of the Superintendent of the Five Civilized Tribes, 

Muskogee, Okla., November 22, 1915. 

In the matter of the application for the enrollment of Mary Ross, nee Duar*. 
nee Fulsom, and her son, Teddy Dunn, as citizens by blood of the ChcK-taw 
Nation. 

William W. Folsom, being first duly sworn, on oath testifies as follows: 

Examination by P. J. Hurley, attorney for the Choctaw Nation : 
Q. State your name? — A. William W. Folsom. 
Q. Where do you reside? — A. Muskogee, Okla. 
Q. Are you a member of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians? — A. I am. 
Q. Where were you born? — A. Atoka, Okla. 
Q. What was your father's name? — A. I. W. Folsom. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 355 

Q. What was your father's profession? — A. Physician and surgeon. 

Q. Did your father liave any brothers? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Name your father's brotliers. — A. A. E. Folsoni, Julius Folsoni, F. E. 
Folsom, and Theodore Fulsoiu, wlio died about 25 or 30 years ago. 

Q. Mary Ross, who chiinis she is 29 years of age, and a daugliter of Wil- 
liam Fulsom, states that William Fulsom was a brother of Emerson Fulsom, 
Dr. Fidsom, and Julius Fulsom. Do you know whether or not your father had 
a brother named William Fulsom?— A. He did not; no, sir. 

Q. Your father's brother, referred to in your statement as A. E. Folsom, is 
Emerson Folsom? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Attached to an application made by Mary Ross for the enrollment of 
herself and child as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation is a petition made 
by W. M. James. Among other statements James alleges : " I also knew her 
father, William Fulsom, and was well acquainted with his brother. Dr. Folsom. 
I knew the other brothers that he had, and know that all of them were Choctaw 
Indians, and were considered as full-blood among the people." Is that state- 
ment true or untrue?— A. It is untrue. My father had no brother named Wil- 
liam Folsom. aiid the statement they were considered as full-bloods is not true; 
they were considered half-blood Indians and were, in fact. 

Q. The affidavit purporting to have been made by Alec Nail, attached to the 
petition of Mary Fulsom, and is in part as follows : 

"Affiant further states that he is well and personally acquainted with the 
FuLsom family, to which the father of the applicant belongs, and that the said 
father of the applicant had seven or eight brothers, and tliat they were all 
enrolled as Choctaws that lived long enough to be enrolled ; that the names 
of the ones he knows best and remembers were Emerson P'ulsom, Dr. Fulsom, 
that were finally enrolled. William died a long time ago." 

Q. Ditl your father have seven or eight brothers? — A. No, sir; he only had 
four brothers. 

Q. And those four are the ones you have lieretofore named in this testi- 
mony? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Yoiu" father had no brother named William? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know anything about the applicant, Mary Ross? — A. No, sir; I 
never heard of her before. 

Q. You were well acquainted with all of the members of your father's 
family? — A. Y'es, sir. 

Q. Your uncles and aunts, except the one who died about the time you were 
born? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How old are you now? — A. I am 38. 

Q. Where did your father reside during his lifetime? — A. He was born near 
Durant, at Old Carriage Point, and he lived at Atoka for many years, and then 
moved from Atola to Oklahoma City and was there for about three years, and 
then moved to Ardmore, where he lived until he died three years ago. 

Q. Was there another Dr. Folsom besides your father? — A. I never heard 
of one. 

Q. You are well acquainted with all of the Fulsoms in the Choctaw Na- 
tion? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. And you never heard of a Dr. Folsom besides yoiu* father? — A. No, sir. 

Witness excused. 

Lee G. Grubbs, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he reported the 
above ca.se on November 22, 1915, and that the foregoing is a true and correct 
transcript of his stenographic notes thereof. 

Lee G. Grubbs. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the 23d day of November, 1915. 
[seal.] Euward Merrick, Notary Public. 

My commission exijires March 17, 3919. 



Department ok the Interior, 
Office of the Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes, 

Mnskogcc, Ohla.. Ni)venibcr 23, tOlo. 

In the matter of the application for the enrollment of Mary Ross, n6e Dunn, 
n6e Fulson, as a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

Mary Ross, n6e Dunn, n6e FuLsom, being first duly sworn, on oath testifies 
as follows: 



356 ' INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Examination by P. J. Hurley, attorney for the t'lioctaw Nation : 

Q. State your name. — A. My name now Mary Ross. 

Q. Where do you live? — A. In Haskell; in business at Haskell. 

Q. Do you live in town? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long have you lived in Haskell? — A. Nearly two yeai-s. 

Q. How old are you? — A. As far as I can tell you, you can count it up. i 
was 6 years old when old Oklahoma was opened up. 

Q. That was in April 22, 1889?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You would be about 30 years old, wouldn't you?^A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where were you born? — A. I was born in Atoka, in the Choctaw Nation — 
that is what my mother said. 

Q. In the town of Atoka? — A. Out in the country. 

Q. Which way from Atoka? — A. You know where the Itjll bridge — cross the 
toll bridge — don't know Avhether it is north or west — north of Atoka. 

Q. Who was your moth«;r? — A. Eliza Folsom ; her real name is Flax, I think 
Eliza Flax. 

Q. She was married to a Folsom? — ^A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was her husband's first name? — A. William Folsom "was what she 
told me. 

Q. Do you know anything about wlio William Folsom was? — A. I never saw 
my father ; he got killed. 

Q. Where was he killed? — A. He was killed, I think slie told me in Denizen. 

Q. How was he killed? — A. He was shot; he was drunk and got killed. 

Q. Who shot him? — A. A man by the name of Tom Wilson, as far as I can 
remember; she always told me that Tom AVilson was a white man. He lived 
three days after he was shot. 

Q. Was your father an Indian? — A. That is what she said. 

Q. Do you know who his relatives were? — A. All the world that I know, she 
has always old me the Folsoms and Colberts. 

Q. You have stated in your petition that Amison, Julius, and Dr. I. W. 
Folsom were brothers of your father? — A. That is what the old people say, 
they were uncles ; that is what I have been told, Amison and Dr. Folsom. He 
used to tell me that. 

Q. Dr. Israel Folsom? — A. Yes, sir; he run a drug store in Atoka after he 
killed Johnny Hawkins. 

Q. Did he tell you that you were a relative of his? — A. Yes, sir ; he helped me 
out. 

Q. Where is he now? — A. He died in Ardmore last year. 

Q. Did he tell you that your father was his brother William? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When did he tell you that? — A. He has always told me that. 

Q. Do you know of any of Dr. Folsom's people besides the doctor?— A. I know 
them if I would see them. I don't really know their names. 

Q. Do you know his daughter who married Mitchell Bond at Oklahoma City? — 
A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you ever see her? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did you see his son? — A. He had two boys last time I seen them — I think 
it was Ardmore, and I was in Ardmore; went to see this very man — this Bal- 
linger, Lindley, and Rodkey, but couldn't find them, so I went and met him, and 
he told me now if the rolls are not open, when the rolls open I will help you to 
get on. 

Q. You don't know any of his sons? — A. I haven't seen them since they got 
grown. 

Q. When did you make that agreement with Ballinger and Lindley and Rodkey 
in regard to your citizenship application? — A. I have letters that I could bring 
with me; it has been with this man five years. I was in Oklahoma City, and 
went before the notary public, and swoi'e, and them — this man — sent it from 
Oklahoma City to Ardmore. I sent him $2 from Oklahoma City. I worked on 
(ii Broadway. 

Q. How long has it been since you lived in the Choctaw Nation? — A. I stayed 
there at different places. 

(}. Where, Caddo?— A. I lived at Atoka. 

Q. Have you lived there since you left? — A. I worked in Atoka. 

Q. When did you live there? — A. I stayed in Ada nearly a year. 

Q. After you left Atoka? — A. I came from the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. After you left Atoka to go to Oklahoma City, how long did you stay in 
Oklahoma then? — A. We stayed there until I was a good-sized girl; I don't 
know just how long. I carried her where I could get the best wages. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 357 

Q. Did you live tliore live or six yt'uisV — A. I lived in Oklahoma City for two 
years at one place. 

Q. When you went there first with your mother? — A. I lived there about two 
years. 

Q. You were sick? — A. No; she was sick. I can't swear where she carried 
me from. We went to Oklahoma City and stayed there a couple of years and 
then to Shawnee, then to Ada, then to Caddo. She was nearly blind. 

Q. The last time you lived in Atoka (hiring the administration of Cleve- 
land? — A. That is the last time I remember of. 

Q. You haven't been back since? — A. No; not in Atoka. 

Q. Did you live in the Choctaw Nation at any other places during the ad- 
ministration of Cleveland?— A. I don't know; at Caddo, I think. 

(}. You recall the Spanish- American War now, don't you? — A. Yes, sir; I re- 
member that. 

Q. Were you living in Oklahoma City or Atoka? — A. I think I was in Caddo 
or Denizen one. 

Q. Denizen, Tex.? — A. Y'^es, sir. I can't say I know. I have some letters, but 
I don't remember whether it was Denizen or Caddo. 

Q. Could you send me the letters or copies of them to find out where you 
were? — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. Have you got the letters you received from Hallinger .-uid Lee in regard 
to your claim? — A. Yes, sir; I think I have. 1 have a trunk in the storage 
house: thev may be in that trunk. I have a lot of stuff in storage in Oklahoma 
Cit.v. 

Q. How did you happen to make this last application for enrollment? — A. I 
*«w it in the paper. 

Q. What in the paper? — A. Where the rolls would be open. 

il What paper? — A. The Tulsa Woi-ld, I think, that the Choctaw rolls would 
be open; I saw all this business advertised, that is why I came over here. I 
seen the Ballinger. but not the I^ee. The gentleman who done this business was 
a heavy, fat man. 

Q. White man? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When you came over here to Muskogee, ivho did you come to see in Mus- 
kogee? — A. I came to that office. 

{}. In this building? — A. I suppose so. 

(i. Were you led to believe they were eni-olling people? — A. I asked and they 
said they were. 

Q. They were enrolling pople? — A. Yes, sir; I asked for Ballinger, and Lee 
was gone, and Ballinger was in W.ashington, D. C, and they were hired by the 
Interior, but this man that was doing this writing he told me he was hired and 
was getting a salary to enroll people, and this colored man. 

i). Did this man tell you he was hired by the Secretai-y of the Interior? — 
A. Yes, sir; his duty was to enroll applicants. 

Q. Did he tell you whether or not he could take any fees for his service? — 
A. He wouldn't take a penny ; was being paid by the Government. 

Q. Who was the colored man? — A. Nelson Durant ; that is the man I give the 
money to. 

Q. AVhat m(»ney? — A. The five dollars. 

Q. How nuich did he ask for? — A. Twenty-five dollars. 

Q. What was the reason? — A. He was charging. I asked him how come him 
to charge, and he said these witnesses. I wouldn't pay him a cent so I says, I 
went l)ack and stalled him. I had the money, but I stalled him, I said after 
these witnes.ses, I know her, and says there is no use in paying that fellow 
anything if he won't take the time up with you and find your i)eople, don't you 
pay him a penny ; so I studied and says that might be I am losing out, and I 
couldn't speak to the white gentlemen, he woiddn't let me in the little room, 
and you go out by the desk, and so I talked to him and didn't know what to do, 
and I made up my mind if he would take it I would give him $5 and promise 
him the other $15, and I never did send the $15 to him. 

Q. You did pay Nelson Durant $5? — A. Yes, sir; and I paid $1.75 to a little 
bitty fellow. 

(). What is he, a notary iiublic? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is his name, Julius Golden? — A. He has a long nose, looks like a 
Jew, I don't think he is an American. 

Q. When did you do this, March of this year, the date of this application? — 
A. Yes, sir. 



358 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Q. That was the day you appeared at Balllnger and Lee's office and paid the 
$5 to Nelson Durant? — A. When was it made up; Marcli 9. 1915. 

Q. What did Nelson Durant say that you should pay this money for? — A. He 
says do you think I am up here for my liealth and takes a book and hunt your 
relatives' and he writes who I am and who my people are, and he carries this 
tiling on a piece of paper in. 

Q. Whose ofhce? — A. The stout man. 

Q. Judge Lindsey? — A. I won't swear that it was. 

Q. Was it in this building on the second floor? — A. I think it was, it wasn't 
this high up; I could tell you what floor if I was to walk up, for I walked up 
that time for I never could get in the elevator for it was always crowded. 

Q. Did he say he had to give the man who was taking your application any 
part of the money? — A. He didn't tell me that, I was to pay him $15 more, send 
him as much as $5 a week, but I didn't send him a penny. 

Q. l>id you pay any money direct to Ballinger"? — A. I .sent him $2. 

Q. When did you send him this money "^ — A. About four years ago. You 
know the year that that colored man killed the high sheriff from Oklahoma 
City. Alf Hunter, the man who was hanged for the murder of the sheriff; I 
mean the year he killed the sheriff. 

Q. You mean Mr. (Jarretson? — A. Got a red-headed .son in Oklahoma City. 
That is the year I went before the notary public and .sworn, and told liim I 
knowed about the papers. I can't tell you everytliiug about it. I sent him 
the $2 and I never got another word from him until I heard he was here. 

Q. Have you liad any letters recently'.' — A. I told you I got it about two 
months ago. I got a letter from Muskogee from Ballinger. so it said to meet 
him in IMuskogee at this office. I wrote to Washington. D. C, about it, and 
I got a letter from Washington, and I fell out with Ballinger and wouldn't 
come to IMuskogee. I thought he was a fraud : he would try to work me for 
more money, and I wouldn't get nothing back. After I wrote to W^ashington 
T gave it up. 

Q. I>o you know W. M. James? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was he one of your witnesses? — A. Yes. sir; l)ald headed; and another 
one that lu^s asthma. They ku/ew me when I was a kid. I saw him about 
two months ago in IMuskogee, and I asked him what about it, and he said he 
was a grand rascal. 

Q. Y"ou say that W. .M. James knew your father and mother '.•' — A. He says he 
does. 

Q. Did he say he knew you when you were a baby? — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. Did you ever .see him before you saw him in Ballinger's office? — A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. On the ;>()tli day of July. 1915, W. :M. .James testified in his case before 
this office, and. among other things, he was asked the questioH, "Are you ac- 
ijuainted with IMary Koss?" and he answered, "Yes, sir; she lives at Haskell." 

Q. Do you know who her father was? — A. No sir ; that is another one of 
the Nails. I don't know anything about her. 

Q. Is this the same one that knew you when you were a girl"? — A. There 
were two Nails. This is the testimony — tall, yellow fellow, bald headed. 

Mr. HtTitLEY. He has an affidavit attached to your p(4ition. He swears now 
that he didn't know. Do you remember him when you were a girl? — A. I re- 
member this old man ; I remember both of these old men. I don't remember 
them; I know their faces. I know this bald-headed man. 

Q. Where did he live? — A. Since I have been grown, in Muskogee. 

ii. When'? — A. Ijong time ago. 

Q. How many years":' — A. I don't know. I wasn't nothing but a kid. There 
is two old men; one has the asthma and the other is bald-headed, and has real 
white hair. The tall, bald-headed one is the one that I know. 

Q. Did you i)romise to i)ay him and Alec Nail $25 each in cash in case yoiv 
wen; enrolled? — A. Nd. sir; something to eat is all. down at a restaurant. 

Q. Did you ever see this man W. M. James before you were introduced to him 
by Nail? — A. I am trying to think; I can't thiidv of those names. 

Q. James; do you know him"? — A. I have s(>eii him; h»^ is from the Choctaw 
Nation. 

Q. Did you know W. M. James before you mi't him in Ballinger's office? — A. 
Yes; I knew this old yellow man; he was W. M. James — William, seems like to 
me. 

Q. Tell mo whether or not the man you are speaking of is W. M. James, who 
made the affidavit? — A. He is an old yellow man; we call him Uncle William. 



INDIAN APPKOPRIATION BILL. 359 

Q. Where did you first know this manV — A. Tlio first time to icnow hiin was in 
Muskogee. 

Q. How long ago? — A. That has been a long time ago. 

Q. Since you have been living in Haskell or before that — where did you live 
when you knew him lirstV — A. I don't know positively the first time I met him; 
he shook hands with me. 

Q. Who was he with? — A. He wasn't with anybody. 

Q. Did he just step up and speak to you? — A. I don't know whether he did 
or not. He just said, " Where are you and where have you been? " I just 
swopped a few words with him and passed him. 

Q. You hadn't seen him before he stepped up to you on tlie street and shook 
hands with you? — A. No, sir. 

Q. How many years ago has that been? — A. I can't tell you. 

Q. Are you married ? — A. Sure, I am ; married twice. 

Q. When were you nuirried to you.r last husband? — A. Al)out five years ago. 

Q. Was it before that? — A. Yes, sir; there was something going on in 
Muskogee. 

Q. Who were you married to before you married Ross? — A. Dan Ranson. 

Q. Where were you married to him? — A. Hern, Tex. 

Q. Was he a colored man? — A. He wasn't. 

Q. What was he? — A. He was supposed to be Cherokee. 

Q. When were you married to him? — A. When I was about 16. 

Q. You are about 30 years of age now? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then you were married to Ranson in Texas 14 years ago? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was it before that that you met James on the streets of ^luskogee? — A. 
Before I was married the first time, no ; after. 

Q. What became of Ranson?— A. He is dead. 

Q. Where did he die? — A. He died in Oklahoma City. 

Q. When? — A. About seven years ago. 

Q. When did you come from Hern, Tex., to Oklahoma ('ity? — A. I can't teli 
you just when ; I was rumiing a hair parlor in Texas wlien I mari'ied. 

Q. How long did you live there after you married before you came to Okla- 
homa? — A. I was visiting there; I learned the lialr trade there; I had been 
writing to him a long time. 

Q. Ranson was never enrolled as a citizen or freedman? — A. No, sir. 

Q. How long had you been living in Texas? — A. I hadn't been there no time; 
it was during the holidays that I laid off. 

Q. You haven't established the first time }nu met James. — A. Tlie first linu' 
I remember him, I rememl)er that I had been married tlie first time wlien I 
met him in Muskogee. 

Q. Did you and your first husband live in Muskogee ■:" — .\. No, sir. 

Q. r)id he die in Oklahoma City? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was it since your first husband died in the last seven years that you first 
met James in Muskogee? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Before you married Ross? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Which is five years ago? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Then you met him lietween six and inne years ago? — .\. Yes, sir. I think 
it was on Second Street. 

Q. That was the first time you had ever seen him? — A. Since I have been 
grown, that is the second time. 

Q. Did you see him l)efore you met him? — A. The first time I remember 
seeing him, the old yellow man, was after I was nuirried the first time, after 
my first husband died. 

Q. Tlien you didn't know him when you were a girl'.' — .\. No, sir; not when 
I was a girl. 

Q. Anotlier affidavit attached to youi' iMtition, tlie aliidavit of .\lec Nail, do 
you know him? — A. Yes, sir; I know him wlien I see iiim. 

Q. Where did you first meet hiin? — A. The first time to l<iio\v iiim was in 
Muskogee. 

Q. How long ago"? — A. I tliink it was this year. March, iliis year. .Viec 
Nail is a low, dark, black fellow, and William is a yellow negro, right white hair. 

Q. Did Alex Nail claim to have known you and know who your parents 
were? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you ever see him before you met bini in r.alliiiger's olliceV — .\. 1 <l(tnt 
remember. 

Q. James has sworn that all he knows jibout y(tu Alex Nail told him, and Alex 
Nail was asked the question, " You didn't know this woman who represents 



360 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

herself to be Mary Ross," and his answer was " No, sir." You knew nothing 
about her parents only what she claimed? — A. I knew William Folsom. 

Q. You don't know whether this man knew anything about you? — A. No, sir; 
I don't. 

Q. Did you pay him anything for making the affidavit? — A. No, sir. I 
give him something to eat and had the ashman man I am talking about with 
him. 

Q. Didn't you give him a dollar or a dollar and a half? What did you get for 
making that affidavit for Mary Koss? — A. I don't know whether it was a dollar 
or dollar and a half. I give each one a dollar to get something to eat and 
they was hungry, then he came back and asked if I would give him fifty cents 
to get whiskey, and I told him I didn't have it. 

Q. State in your own way where the (^lifCerent places that you have lived 
since you left Atoka, tlie year of the opening of old Oklahoma, 1889. — A. I 
lived in (Auldo awhile 

Q. You stated awhile ago you lived in Oklahoma City. — A. I told you I was 
six years old when she carried me away and she carried me to Oklahoma City 
and Ardmore. 

Q. How long did you stay in Oklahoma City? — A. Two years. 

Q. Then you left Oklahoma City to go to Ardmore when you were eight years 
old? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How long did you stay there? — A. About a mouth or two. 

Q. Where did you go to from Ardmore? — A. Shawnee. 

Q. How long did you live in Shawnee? — A. I stayed there about eight or 
nine months. 

Q. Where did you go from Shawnee? — A. I went to Ada. 

Q. How long did you stay in Ada? — A. I stayed there nearly a year. 

Q. You stayed in Ada until you were about 10 years old? — A. Yes, sir; 1 
was born July 6th. 

Q. What year? — A. I don't know; I just know I was born July 6th. 

Q. Where did you go to from Ada? — A. We came back to Oklahoma City. 

Q. How long did you stay in Oklahoma City that time? — A. I don't know 
exactly. We worked in Oklahoma City, kept house, my mother was a house- 
keeper in Oklahoma City for a man named Too-John. 

Q. Was he a white man? — A. Yes, sir; he was a white man. 

Q. How old were you when you left Oklahoma City the next time? — A. I 
don't remember ; seems to me she stayed there a good while and they sold 
out and loft there and went to a place — they don't allow colored people there, 
there is a brick yard there ; I don't know where the town was. 

Q. Which way from Oklahoma City? — A. I don't know; there is a little town 
with a Sutton Hotel. 

Q. Was it in Old Oklahoma or Territory? — A. I don't know; there wasn't 
oil there but it is now. 

Q. How old were you when you went there? — A. I don't know just how old 
I was. 

Q. How long did you remain in Oklahoma City this last time — the time 
you spoke of now when your mother kept house for Too-John? — A. I think 
we stayed there nearly a year. 

Q. You were 10 years old when you left Ada to go there and you must have 
been 11 when you left Oklahoma City the second time ; you went to a town 
you don't know the name of? — A. There wasn't anything there then much. 

C^ Do vou remember the fare from Oklahoma City to this place? — A. It was 
$1.60. 

Q. Do you remember what railroad you traveled on? — A. I don't remember 
what railroad, but we changed cars at Osage Junction ; I don't know whether 
it is in the Choctaw or Osage Nation. 

Q. You went from Oklahoma City? — A. We stayed there and worked for a 
man by the name of Sutton. I worked in the pantry for him. 

Q. How long did you stay there? — A. I stayed there eight or nine months in 
that place. 

Q. Wlien you left that place where did you go? — A. We came back to Okla- 
homa City. 

Q. How long did you stay there tills time? — A. I don't remember ; we stayed 
there a long time. 

Q. Were you married in Oklahoma City that time? — A. No, sir. 

Q. How old were you? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Did you stay there a year or two years? — A. My mother died before I 
ever left. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BTIX. 361 

Q. Your luothei' died in Oivlahoma City when yon went back? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How old were you when your mother died? — A. I don't remember; I have 
forgotten ; I know I had been working; and taking care of her. 

Q. Where did you go from Okhihoma City that time? — A. I worked for a 
woman in Shawnee. 

Q. Who was the Woman? — A. Miss Nellie. 

Q. Nellie who? — A. Just Miss Nellie is all I know; she was a big fat woman. 

Q. Wliat does she do? — A. Runs a rooming house. 

Q. Were you a gi'own woman when you worked for her? — A. I wasn't when 
my mother' died. 

Q. Were you grown when you worked for Miss Nellie — how long did you 
work for her? — A. About a year, I think, and two months. I know I spent a 
Christmas with her. I remember what she gave me. 

Q. Where did you go when you left Shawnee? — A. I went with some white 
people when I left Shawnee — a railroad man's wife by the name of Whitson. 
She was sick, and I went with her to Monero, Mexico ; stayed two weeks and 

came back to Shawnee, and I left then and went to and stayed with a 

doctor ; I believe I have forgotten. I stayed with these .white people until I 
married. I married this fellow Ranson ; I met him the first time ; I don't know 
whether it was in Caddo or in new Oklahoma ; got acquainted with him on the 
train. I used to always go with the white people ; never went with the colored 
people. 

]Mr. Hurley. You are not telling me where you went to? — A. I lived with 
her a long time, and I met tliis man on the train. 

Q. What did he do on the train? — A. Nothing: he was traveling; he said he 
came from the Cherokee Nation. 

Q. Indian or freedman? — A. He looked like an Indian. 

Q. Where were you married to him? — A. Hern, Tex. This woman — I was 
with her — she had consumption. 

Q. You were not living in the Choctaw Nation, you were living at Shawnee? — 
A. She would live a week or two at a place. She had a child. 

Q. What was the child's name? — A. Henry. 

Q. How old was he? — A. Three years old. 

Q. How old was Henry when you first started staying with her? — A. He was 
setting alone and crawling around. 

Q. How old was Henry when you quit staying with this woman? — A. He was 
walking; this woman died before I married, but I was engaged to this man; 
he commenced writing from the day he met me on the train. We was on our 
way to San Antonio, Tex. 

Q. Did you go to that town in Texas to marry? — A. No; I met him in Texas; 
I was canvassing, selling hair goods. 

Q. Who were you selling hair to, white or colored? — A. I handled white hair, 
and I also manicured. I would put my ad in barber shops. They w'ould have 
the boys bring me the message, and I would go to residence and do the work. 

Q. Did you ever work in a white barber shop. — A. I put my ad in them. 

Q. How old were you when you married Ranson ? — A. I was about 16 ; that 
was the way I counted. 

Q. You had never been back to the Choctaw Nation to live l)efore you 
married him from the time you left there with your mother, just go there after 
you married Ranson, how long was it before you went back to the Choctaw 
Nation? — A. Haven't been back to amount to anything. I have lived in Ada. 

Q. Have you lived in the Choctaw Nation since you married Ranson?— pA. 
No, sir. 

Q. You were 1(5 when you married him? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You hadn't lived in the Ciioctaw Nation before you married him since 
your mother had left there for Oklahoma City? — A. I think not. 

Q. You stated that you were a daughter of William Folsom?^A. That is 
what my mother told me. He was the brother of Emerson, Doctor, and Don, 
but I know Doctor. 

Q. Do you know .Julius Folsom? — A. No, sir; they say they were Indians 
and not half-breeds. 

Mr. Hurley. If you were confronted with the fact that Dr. Folsom never 
had a brother named William Folsom, no such person ever existed, what are 
you going to say about that? You saw that young man standing over there, 
that is William Folsom, the son of Dr. Israel Folsom. We have just taken 
his testimony. He stated he was enrolled as of the age of 24. He is not 
older than you are, he couldn't possibly be your father. His father is Dr. I. W. 



362 !ndiax appeopkiatiox bill. 

Folsoin, the nmn yoii claim was yoiir uncle. This man has sworn, and the 
records of this office bear out this statement, that he didn't have an uncle 
iiauKHl William Folsom. His father never had a brother named William 
Folsom. What is your statement in the face of these facts? — A. That is all I 
know, what my mother told me ; that might not have been my father's name. 
My father was a Folsom in the Choctaw Nation, and I told you people I know 
old lady Flax ; I used to roll her around in a chair. 

Q. Was she white? — A. She was an Indian; she was 150 years old when she 
died, they said. 

Q. What relation was your mother to her? — A. I don't know wkat kin she 
was, but she was kin. 

Q. Did she work for her? — A. No, sir; not that I know of. 

Q. You don't know who your mother was kin to? — A. The Flaxes, she- told 
me ; I never bothered with them. 

Q. You don't know whether your father was a brother of Israel Folsom? — A^ 
He was a brother of these folks ; T know the Folsoms, all right. 

Q. I'ou dtm't know whether your father was any relation or not? — A. When 
I went to Ardmore some years ago and Lee was enrolling, I met Dr. Folsom 
and told him about it, and he said where your father lived he was always 
passed as an Indian, and I have always passed for an Indian. My mother is 
white; ask anybody that has .seen her picture; you would swear she was 
Cherokee. 

Q. Did your mother tell you she was married? — A. She said " INIy husband 
got killed."" 

Q. Your present husband is a colored man? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. He is not a citizen of any tribe? — A. No sir. 

Q. Your former husband claimed to have Cherokee bloo<l, but wasn't en- 
rolled? — A. I don't know whether he was enrolled or not. 

Q. When did he die? — A. He has been dead seven years. I will see if I 
can find some letters he got from his kinspeople in the Cherokee Nation. 

Q. You live with the colored folks? — A. No, sir; not now. I have been 
raised right ui> with the white people nearly all my life ; never did associate 
with the colored people. I would like for you to see my mother's picture, 
maybe somebody would recognize her. I was six years old — I remember that 
when the year that Cleveland was President, the last year that he was in 
office, my mother carried me to the depot in Atoka and the band was playing 
on the train and I know she held me up so I could see. She showed me those 
people going to Denison. That is all I know about the Folsoms. I guess any- 
body would ti-y a chance for getting anything. I have been living without it. 
When the man talked about the money I don't know what my mother said. My 
mother went by the name of Eliza Folsom, and she has been married three 
times. She married a man once by the name of Gus .Tohnson, no Lane, Gus 
Lane, before I was gr(nvn, and the man left her ; she conuuenced getting blind. 
I traveled with white people and was raised with white people. 

Q. Was your mother married to any of these husbands before you were born; 
she was married to Lane before you were born? — A. No, sir; I remember her 
marrying well. 

Q. Who was she married to before she married Lane? — A. I don't know, and 
lie didn't stay very long. 

Q. Was he colored? — A. He didn't look like it. 

Q. Did he as.sociate with colored men? — A. No, sir; he run a shoe store. 

Q. Where, in Oklahoma (Jity? — A. I think that is where she saw him; he was 
a .shoemaker. 

Q. How old were you when she died? — A. A very small girl. 

Q. Eight or ten?— A. No not that old. 

Q. Six? — A. I suppose so. 

Q. How long was she in Oklahoma City before she married him? — A. Not 
very long. 

Q. Wiis yoiu- father killed before* you were born? — A. Y'es, sir. 

Q. Did you have any bi'others and sisters? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Yom- mother never had any other children"? — A. I think three or four. 

Q. Who was the father? — A. I never asked her. 

Q. Do you know whether she was married to your father? — A. I couldn't 
swear to that. 

Q. Do you know the children? — A. The children are all dead. 

Q. Y'ou don't know whether this man Folsom was the father of these children 
born before you? — A. I don't know. All her children is dead but me. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 363 

Q. Will you send me those letters you claimed to have received from Bal- 
linger? — A. Yes, sir; I will hunt them all up; lots of them are postal cards. 
He told me the roll was open. 

Q. How long ago has it been?— A. Not very long. 

Q. Has it been six months since he wrote you? — A. Said he would let me 
know, and for me to keep up and see when the roll, the Choctaw rolls wei-e 
open. 

Q. When was that? — A. A good while ago. 

Q. These men that took your application, what officer of the Interior Depart- 
ment did they say they represented, the Secretary of the Interior, the Commis- 
sioner of Indian Affairs, or the Superintendent of the Five Civilized Tribes? — 
A. The Secretary of the Interior. They told me Choctaws and Creeks and 
Chickasaws, and there was a (^reek and Chickasaw woman there. Susan 
Harris enrolled her child the same day I was enrolled, and another woman 
from the Cherokee Nation the same day, and there was four of us — there was 
six enrolled there that day. 

Q. Did those people claim they were authorized by the Government to enroll 
those people? — A. This white man told me he was getting a salary from the 
Government to enroll the people ; he wouldn't take any money from them. I 
never offered him any. I sat in front of the table. The old man, both of them 
talked so plain I was getting the value of the land in money. I told them I 
iii<ln't <'are for the land ; I will take anything. I will set up the cigars, and he 
says INIrs. Ross, I would not take one penny from you or anybody I ever saw 
to do this work, because the Government has me hired. I am getting my 
salary from Washington, D. C. I said if I was to get any money I would not 
mind setting them up. 

Q. That was in Ballinger's office? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. The colored man was Nelson Durant? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who was the white man doing the speaking? — A. He didn't say what his 
name was. He was a big, fat luan ; not as tall, but heavier than you are. I 
think it was Judge TJndly ; he told me he was raised in the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. Did he say he was from I\lA\lester? — A. Yes, sir; South McAlester. 

Q. Did you have your son enrolled, Theodore Dunn* — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How old is he? — A. Eleven years old. 

Q. Where was he born? — A. He was born at Caddo. 

Q. Did you ever live at Le Heigh? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you married to this boy's father? I thought you only married 
twice. — A. I told you I had been married two times. I named that boy after 
someone else. I had cause for naming him what I did. 

Q. You were not married to this boy's father? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Who was this boy's father and what i:^ his name? — A. 1 aint going to 
lell you any more. 

Mr. HiKi.EY. How do you expect us to know what his rights :ire? — A. I 
didn't claim Ik; was an Indian. I don't know anything about him being an 
Indian. 

Q. I>o you know who his father was? — A. Sure I know his father. 

Q. Where does he live? — A. He is dead: they said the boy could be put on 
the rolls through me. I never tried to get him in on his father. They made 
me i)ay $1.7."). 

Q. Were you married to Koss when this boy was born? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you nuirried to Hanson at the time he was born? — A. I was mar- 
ried, which one I can't tell yon; I don't want to ruin my reputation; I will 
tell you privately. 

Q. Did you ever make application for cnrollnieiit during the time the rolls 
were being made? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did you make it? — A. With Ballingcr and Ia'v. 

Q. While they were making the roll? — A. I was not here. 

Q. Where did you live? — A. I was with my mother. 

Q. In Oklahoma City?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Why was it you didn't make it before now? — A. I told you that I didn't 
make application before this time, and I told them I had ma<le api)lication to 
linlliiiger, and he said he was the man g(Hting uj) the Choctaw rolls, and he 
told me to go before a notary iMiblic, and I had to go before three — one in 
Oklahoma City and one in Shawnee and had to give each one a dollar and go 
before another here and paid him 75 cents, which made $2.75. 

Q. Did you have any other chlhlren besides tins Dunn boy? — A. Yes, sir; I 
had three ; they are dead. 



364 INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL. 

Q. Who was the father? — A. Ranson. 

Q. Where were those children boraV — A. Different parts of , Oklalioma. 

Q. This child that you make application for hasn't any claim except through 
youV — A. No, sir; I didn't think it was fraudulent by them coming out so 
publicly, but if had been in a private place I wouldn't have went to see about 
it, but I was told by lots of people that this was in this office. A public place, 
a tine place before a crowd of people. I never thought about it being a fraud. 
If 1 am prosecuted for anything I can hold this man, and this colored man he 
carrie.s me into this office, and this white man copies off of this piece of paper 
and puts it on two pieces of paper. He keeps one, they keep oik^ This colored 
man writes in this room out of a book, then he carries it in there. He claims 
he tinds your relatives on the roll, and all I swore to is that my mother said 
that the Fulsoms was my people and the Flaxes were her people. I was born 
after my father died. 

Q. You wouldn't have gone before these people if you hadn't thought them offi- 
cers of the United States?— A. Sure I wouldn't have paid the colored man $5 
and woiUdn't have paid them the $15, but my mind didn't feel right. After I 
had stalled him and told him I would send him the $15 I talked to several 
lawyers and they said he was a grand rascal and had been to the penitentiary, 
and that Lee had run oft" for some cause. Different people that I knew when 
1 got this last letter about two months ago to come to Muskogee, it said if 
you want to know something about this enrollment come to Muskogee at once, 
and I wrote and answered the letter. Got one and I read it and I says, "Ain't 
nothing to it," and I sits down and writes 'Mf there is anything to do let me 
know at once by answering," and I have never heard since. When I got this 
letter I said, " I am going to see about this, whether it is bad or good." 

Q. ^^■ill you ask Alice Cole to come up here? — A. Yes, sir; they have all been 
chilling, i know Susan Harris. This thing was all right; Susan Harris, the 
woman, she has got plenty of property in this country ; that made me feel all 
right. You know her girl was enrolled in this same office. 1 asked her " have 
you heard from that enrollment?" And she said "maybe you won't get on for 
two or three months." Jack Simmonds hold me he thought it was all right. 
AVhite people have told me they didn't see why this man wanted to cheat me 
out of that money. I told them I wouldn't pay the other $15, but if I found out 
everything was all right I wouldn't mind tipping them all. Ballinger wanted me 
to sign a i)aper that give him 10 per cent. 

Q. Where did you sign it? — A. In Oklahoma City. 

French Kayburn, being first duly sworn, on oath states that as stenographer 
to the national attorney for the Choctaw Nation he reported the proceedings in 
the above-entitled case on tlie 23d day of November, 1915, and that the fore- 
going is a true and correct transcript of his stenographic notes thereof. 

French Rayburn. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me on this the — day of November, 1915. 

[seal.] R- P- Harrison, 

Clerk U. S. Court, East. Dist. Okla. 



By Wii-r.iAM L. Boone, 

Deputy. 



My connuission expires 



CASE NO. 5A. 



Petition of Emily Mills, nee xVllen, for the Enrollment of Herself and 
Minor Child, Mary Mills, as Choctaw Freedmen. 

Comes now Emily Mills, nee Allen, and states and shows that she is 28 
years of age, and that she lives and resides at 427 Extra Street, Tulsa, Okla. ; 
that she was born and reared in tlie Choctaw Nation and resided in said 
Nation until about the year 1902. when she removed to Ardmore, in the Chicka- 
saw Nation, and since removed to Tulsa, Okla., her present address. 

Petitioner states that she is a daughter of Bart Allen, who was a Choctaw 
freedman by right and residence, but that her said father was never enrolled. 

Petitioner further states that her said father was a full brother to Kizzie 
Allen, a Choctaw freedman, and who, as such, is duly enrolled upon the 
approved rolls of the said (Jhoctaw Nation opposite roll No. 3663. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 365 

Petitioner further states that slio was duly and legally married June 9. 
1904, to Lum Mills, and that to this union there have heen horn the following 
named cliilden : INIary Mills, born March 17, 1905, living, and not enrolled ; Lonnie 
Mills, born Septemi>er 2, 1907, deceased. 

Petitioner states that, by reason of her right to enrollment through the 
blood of her said father, and by reascm of the date of the birth of her said 
child, Mary Mills, her said child, Mary Mills, is also entitled to enrollment 
upon the approved rolls of the Choctaw Nation. 

Wherefore, petitioner prays that the names of herself, Emily Mills, and of her 
said minor child, IVIary Mills, be placed upon the approved rolls of the said 
Choctaw Nation, as Choctaw freed men ; and that to them there be given their 
respective distributive shares of the common property and fimds of said Choc- 
taw Tribe of Indians, the same as is given to all other citizens so enrolled as 
such freedmen. And she will ever pray. 

Emily Mills. 



State of Oklahoma, 

County of Okfuskee, ss: 

Emily Mills, nee Allen, after being first duly sworn, upon her oath, states 
that she is 28 years of age ; that she is the person named in the within, above, 
and foregoing petition for the enrollment of herself and her minor child, Mary 
Mills ; that she has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof ; 
and that the statements, matters, and things therein set forth and contained 
are true. 

Dated this 7th day of April, A. D. 1915. 

Emily Mills. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me, Charles E. Guthrie, a notary public in 
and for the above named county and State, on this the 7th day of April, 
A. D. 1915. 

[seal.] Chas. E. Guthrie, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expires January 9, A. D. 1917. 



•affidavit of G. W. WILSON IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF EMLEY MILLS, N^E 

allen, for the enrollment of herself and her minor child, aiaiiy mills, 
as choctaw freedmen. 

State of Oklahoma, 

County of Okfunkee ss: 

G. W. AVilson, after being first duly sworn, upon his oath, depo.ses and 
says that he is about 39 years of age; that he lives and resides at 619 East 
Archie Street, Tulsa, Okla. 

Afliant further states that was, for a long time, a resident of the Choctaw 
Nation ; and that he is and has always been well and personally acquainted 
with Bart Allen, of Idabel (I. T.), Okla.; and that he, affiant, knows that the 
said Bart Allen was a full brother to Kizzie Allen, who is duly enrolled upon 
the approved rolls of the Choctaw Nation as a Choctaw Freedman ; and oppo- 
site roll No. 3GC3. 

Afiiant states that the petitioner above named, Emley Mills, nee Allen, is a 
daughter of the said Bart Allen and a niece of the said Kizzie Allen, Clioctaw 
FrcM'dmnn, roll No. .3(503; and that the said Emley Mills, nge Allen, was duly 
and legally married to Lum IMills in the year 1902; and that to this union ii 
child l)y the name of Mary Mills was born. That I do not know the exact date 
of the birtli of the said Mary IMills, but know that she was born some time 
during the year 190."); and that .said Mary Mills is still living. 

Further adiant saith not. 

Dated this 7th day of April, A. D. 1915. 

G. W. Wilson. 

Sub.scribi'd and sworn to before me, Chas. E. Guthrie, a notary public in and 
for Okfuskee County, Okla., tliis tlie 7th day of April, A. D. 1915. 

[seal.] Chas. E. Guthrik, Notary Public. 

My commission expires January 9, A. D. 1917. 



366 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

affidavit of nelson t. tolbert in support of the petition of emley mills, 
nee allen, in support of her petition for the enrollment of herself 
and her minor child, mary mills, as choctaw freedmen. 

State of Oklahoma, 

County of Okfuskee, ss: 
Nelson" T. Tolbert, after being first duly sworn, upon his oath, deposes and 
states that he is 57 years of age; that he lives and resides at G19 East Archie 
Street, Tulsa, Okla. ; that he was born and reared in the Choctaw Nation, and 
resided in said nation until about the year 1902. 

Affiant further states that he is and always been well and intimately ac- 
quainted with the family of Aliens of which Bart Allen was a member ; that 
the said Bart Allen and Kizzie Allen were full l)rotlier and sister. That the 
said Kizzie Allen is enrolled as a Choctaw Freedman opposite roll No. 3G8G. 

Affiant further states that the petitioner herein above named, Emley Mills, 
nee Allen, is a daughter of the said Bart Allen; and that the said Emley Mills, 
nee Allen, was duly and legally married to Lum IMills about 10 years ago; 
that the said Lum and Emley ]Mills have a child, whose name is Mary ; and 
that said Mary Mills was born some time during the ni-onth of March, 1905; 
and that said Mary Mills, niinor, is still living. 
Further affiant saith not. 
Dated this 7th day of April, A. D. 1915. 

Nelson T. Tolbert (his thumb mark). 
Witnesses to mark : 
G. W. Nelson. 
Daist R. Morton. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me, Chas. E. Guthrie, a notary public, this 
the 7th day of April, A. D. 1915. 

[SEAL.] CiiAS. E. Guthrie, Notnni I'ublic. 

My commission expires January 9, A. D. 1917. 

The name of Nelson T. Tolbert written by me at his request and in his 
presence, he then made Ins thumb print. 

C. E. Guthrie. 



STATEMENT OF P. J. HURLEY, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHOCTAW NATION. 

In re petition of Emily Mills, nee Allen, for the enrollment of herself and minor 
child, Mary Mills, as Choctaw freedmen. 

The foregoing petition was served upon me by Mr. Webster Ballinger, attor- 
ney at law, of Washington, D. C. 

The petitioner claims that she resided in the Choctaw Nation during the 
time the rolls were being made, but that she did not make application for 
enrollment during that i)eriod. Even if all the allegations made in the plaintiff's 
petition were ti"ue, she would not now be entitled to t>nrollment. 

The act of July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. L., G41). which approved the supplemental 
agreement between the Choctaw-Chickasaw people and the United States, pro- 
vides in part as follows : 

*< * * * rpjjg application of no person whomsoever for enrollment shall be 
received after the expiration of the said 90 days." 

The 90 days herein referred to is 00 days after the ratification of the agree- 
ment by the' Choctaw and Chickasaw people. The agreement was ratified on 
September 25, 1902. Emily IMills did not make application for enrollment 
within the time required by law, and under Ihe law would not be entitled to 
enrollment, even if her statements regarding her rights as a freedman citizen 
of the Choctaw Nation were true. 

Again there is no definite or reliable evidence to show that Emily Mills was 
a resident of the Choctaw Nation on Jiuie 28, 1898. The act of Congress ap- 
proved June 28, 1898 (80 Stat. L., 495), by which the Atoka agreement between 
the United States and the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations was approved, 
provides in part as follows: 

" No person shall be enrolled who has not heretofore removed to and in good 
faith settled in the nation in which he claims citizenship." 



INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL. 367 

The foregoing are legal bars wlili'h wonkl prevent the enrollment of Emily 
Mills as a freedman citizen of the ('ho<-ta\v Nation, even if the allegations of 
her petition were true, but the allegations of the petition of this applicant are 
untrue. She is not a freedman citizen of the Choctaw Nation ; her father's 
name was not Bart Allen as alleged in her petition, but was in fact Bart 
Holmes. On this point the applicant herself testified as follows : 

Q. Did Bart Holmes and your mother live together up until her tleath? — 
A. Yes, sir ; they were living together when my mamma died. 

Q. Were they living together at the time you tirst recollect anything? — 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You regarded him as your father? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You were told that he was your father? — A. Yes, sir. That was all I 
knew anything about it. Then folks begun to tell me back there. 

Q. What did they say? — ^A. That man is not your papa. Your father's name 
was Allen. 

Q. You say you don't remember the given name of this Allen, your father? — 
A. No, sir ; I don't. 

Q. You know anything about where he lived?— A. No, sir; I don't. 

Q. Do you know when he died? — A. No; I don't. 

The testimony of this witness will indicate that her father's name was not 
Bart Allen at all. but was in fact Bart Holmes, and that she assumed the name 
of Allen for the purpose of attempting to establish relationship with the freed- 
woman, Kizzie Allen, whose name appears upon the Choctaw rolls. 

Again in this same testimony the witness states : 

Q. You state in your application that your father's name was Bart Allen. 
You state to me that you do not remember the given name of your father. How 
about this? — A. Well, I really don't know the name of my own papa. I gave 
Holmes as my papa. The old man, the old gentleman, I calls grandpa, he told 
me about my father. His name — it was Bart or something like that. He told 
me about my father before I went over there. 

This statement means that she was told to swear that Bart Allen was her 
father before she went before the attorneys who were taking applications for 
enrollment as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. Her testimony will show that 
the man to whom she refers as grandpa is Nelson Tolbert, a negro, who has 
served Mr. Ballinger and his associates in many of these cases as a witness. 

Nelson Tolbert's affidavit, which is intended to corroborate the false state- 
ments contained in the petition of the applicant, is, in part, as follws : 

" Affiant further states that he is and always been well and intimately ac- 
quainted with the family of Aliens of which Bart Allen was a member ; that the 
said Bart Allen and Kizzie Allen were full brother and sister. That the said 
Kizzie Allen is enrolled as a Choctaw freedman opposite roll No. 3063." 

On November 27, 1915, Nelson Tolbert, after being first duly sworn, testified 
as follows : 

Q. Do you know Kizzie Allen? — A. Kizzie Allen; I know of her. I don't think 
I know her. Don't know her personally. 

Q. Was she an Indian or negro? — A. I don't know. 

When Tolbert was testifying he apparently forgot that these applicants were 
endeavoring to be enrolled as freedmen of the Choctaw Nation and he attempts 
in his testimony to establish the fact that they are Indiaiis. A copy of Tolbert's 
testimony is attached hereto. 

There is attached hereto a photographic copy of freedman census card No. 
3103, showing the enrollment of Kizzie Allen. 

This card shows that Kizzie Allen did not have a brother named Bart Allen — 
in fact, the card shows that "Allen " was her married name and not her maiden 
name. Her husband was (ieorge Allen, a Chickasaw freedman. The mother of 
Kizzie Allen was Winnie I'itchlyn, a slave of I'eter IMtchlyn. The name of 
Kizzie Allen's mother apiu-ars on Choctaw freedman census card No. 429 — a 
p.hotographic copy of which is attached hereto. 

The evidence in this case is cfniclusive on the following points: 
First. That Kizzie Allen did not have a brother named I'.art Allen. 
Second. That Ihe MiijilicMUt's father was not named Bart Allen, but was in 
fad liart Holmes. 

Third. 1'his applicant is not a freedman of the Choctaw Nation, and is not 
related to Kizzie Allen. 

Fourth. That the allegations of the petition of this applicant and the affi- 
davit of Nelson Tolbert in support thereof are false. 

P. J. HURLKY, 

National Attorney for the Choctaw Nation. 



368 



TNDL\X .Vl'PKOL'HIATlOX BILL. 

Cliocfdir \atioii. frcciliiuii nill. 
[Residence: Eagle County. Post office: Eagle Town, I. T. Field No. 429.] 



Dawes 
roU 
No. 


Name. 


Relation- 
ship to per- 
son first 
named. 


Age. 


Sex. 


Tribal enrollment. 


Slave of— 


Year. 


County. 


No. 


931 


1 Gable, Albert 




40 

36 
12 
69 


Male.... 

Female.. 

Male 

Female.. 


1896 

1896 
1896 
1896 


Eagle 

...do 

...do 

...do 


1515 

1516 
1517 
2753 


Peter Pitch- 


932 
933 
934 


2. Gable, Virginia 

3. Gable, Robert 

4. Pitchlynn, Winnie . 


Wife 

Son 

Mother 


lynn. 
Calvin Howell. 

Peter Pitch- 
lynn. 



Stamped: Enrollment of Nos. 1, 2, 3, and 4 hereon approved by the Secretary of Interior, Mar. 6, 1903. 





Name of father. 


Father's 

tribal 

enrollment. 


Father's owner. 


Name of mother. 


Mother's 

tribal 

enrollment. 


Mother's owner. 




Year. County. 


Year. County. 




1 

2 


Charlie Howell.. 

Ben Pitchlynn.. 
No 1 


De'd Eagle. 

1896 ...do... 
do... 


Calvin Howell... 
Peter Pitchlynn. 


Winnie Pitch- 
lynn. 
Lucy Pitchlynn. 
No.2 


1896 Eagle . 
1896 ...do... 


Peter Pitchlsmn. 
Calvin Howell. 


4 




i...do... 


Choctaw 


Celia Butler 


1896 Eagle 


Peter Pitchlynn. 






1 





Clioctaiv Nation, frvcdmcu roll. 
[Post office: South McAlester, I. T. Field No 



Dawes' 


Name. 


Relation- 
ship to 
person 

first 
named. 


Age. 


Sex. 


Tribal enrollment. 




roll 
No. 


Year. 


County. 


No. 


Remarks. 


3663 






27 
9 

12 
6 


F. 
F. 
M. 
M. 








Not on roll. 


2297 
2298 


Allen, Bertie 

Allen, Henderi'on 
Allen, Jefferson. . 


Dau 

Son 

...do.... 


1896 
1896 
1896 


TobucVsy 

do 


2 
3 
4 




2299 


do 











(Stamped:) Enrollment of No. 1 hereon. Approved by the Secretary of Interior Sept. 26, 1903. Enroll- 
ment of Nos. 2, 3, 4 hereon. .Approved by the Secretary of Interior .\pr. 8, 1903. 

No. 2 on roll as Luvina Allen. 

No. 4 on roll as Oliver -Allen. 

Husband of No. 1 and father of children hereon is No. 1 on 1896 roll. 

Mother of No. 1 on (hoc. Freed, card No. 429. 

Husband of No. 1 and father of children hereon is George Allen, ( hickasaw freedman card No. 956. See 
affidavit of No. 1, filed Mar. 14, 1903. 





Name of father. 


Father's tribal enrollment. 


Name of mother. 


Mother's owner. 




Year. 


County. 


1 




Non cit 


Winnie Pitchlyn. . 
No. 1 


Peter Pitchlyn. 


2' 




Dd 


Atoka 




3 


do 




do 




4 


do 






do 

















INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 369 

Department of the Interior, 
Office of the Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes, 

Tulsa, Okla., November 11, 1915. 

In the matter of the application for enrollment of Emily Mills, nee Allen, as 

a Choctaw freedman. 

Mrs. Emily Mills, being first duly sworn by William L. Bowie, United States 
deputy clerk of the United States Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma, 
on oath testified as follows : 

Examination by Mr. William L. Bowie : 

Q. State your name. — A. My name — my mother was married twice 

Q. What is your name nowV — A. Emily Mills. 

Q. Emma Mills? E-m-m-a M-i-1-l-s? — A. E-m-i-1-y M-i-1-l-s, the way I would 
spell it. 

Q. How old are you? — A. Don't know 'zactly. I can't remember about my 
father and very little about my motlier, only what folk say. * * * 

Q. About how old are you, as near as you can tell? — A. I estimate about 
27 or 28. 

Q. Where do you live? — A. I live here in Tulsa. 

Q. What number and street? — A. Four hundred and twenty-seven Exeter. 

Q. You are married? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. I'^our husband living? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. State his name? — A. Columbus Mills. 

Q. What is your husband's occupation? What does he do? — A. He works 
at the hotel. 

Q. Hotel porter? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What hotel?— A. The Metropolitan Hotel. 

Q. Here in Tulsa?- — A. l^es, sir. 

Q. Do you know who was your mother? — A. Mary. Her name was Mary. 
That's what the old gentleman tells me. 

Q. AVhat was her surname? — A. She was married — as near as I can come 
at it, first married to Allen 

Q. What was the name of Allen; what was his given name? — A. That is 
where I can't remember. I can't remember him. 

Q. Is your mother living? — A. No, sir ; she is dead. 

Q. Where did she die?— A. I think about Hugo — down about there — below 
there — down at little town. I don't remember the name. Down below there 

Q. Down about Idabel?— A. I think that's the town. The town of 

Q. Below Hugo? — A. l^es, sir; I know that was the place, Idabel. 

Q. Did slie die in town? — A. No, sir; near the town, from what I was told. 
There is an old gentleman here who knows her better than I knows him 
myself. 

Q. What is the name of this man? — A. We calls him grandpa. Lives on 

Q. Don't you know his name? — A. Tolliver or Tolliber, something like that. 

Q. Nelson Tolbert? — A. Yes, sir. I aUvays calls him grandpa. 

Q. How long has your mother been dead? — A. Well, I don't know. You can 
ask — I can't remember it. 

Q. How long has your father been dead? — A. I can't remember him. I don't 
remember my papa at all. 

Q. How old were you when your mother died? — A. Don't know 'xactly. I 
was quite small. After mamma died I went to white people that mamma 
works for. 

Q. Were you old enough to work out when your mother died? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Were you a good-sized girl? — A. Old enough to remember, but wasn't 
working out. 

(}. Did these white people take you right away? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was the name of these people? — A. Brown. 

Q. What was the given name? — A. I don't know, sir. I always calls her Mrs. 
Brown. 

Q. Where did she live? — A. In the country where we lived. 

Q. Out from Idabel? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How far? — A. I don't know, sir. 

31362—16 24 



370 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Q. What direction? — A. I can't toll you tliat. I can't tell you to save my 
life. You know just about how a kid is. I don't know. This old gentleman 
knew me. He always tells me 

Q. Have you any sisters? — A. No, sir. If there was I didn't know anything 
about them. 

Q. Did you ever have any sisters?— A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Did you ever have any brothers? — A. Not that I know of. 

Q. What was your father's name? — A. l\Iy own father I never saw. They 
said his name was Allen. I don't know. Often used to tell me about him. 

Q. You never saw him? — A. Not that I remember. 

Q. W^ere they married? — A. I suppose so. 

Q. That is your understanding? — A. Mine? Yes, sir. My mother married 
twice, so the old gentleman said. 

Q. You were told that she married twice? — -A. Yes, sir. 

Q. W'hat was the name of this man you speak of? The one you refer to as 
the second husband of your mother? — A. Holmes. 

Q. What was his given name? — A. I think they said his name was Bart 
Holmes. The white folks always said Bart. 

Q. Is he living? — A. I don't know whether he is living or not. 

Q. Was he living at the time your mother died? — A. Wlio? 

Q. Bart Holmes. — A. Y"es, sir ; he was living. 

Q. Did Bart Holmes and your mother live together up until her death? — 
A. Yes, sir ; they were living together when my mamma died. 

Q. Were they living together at the time you first recollect anything? — A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. You regarded him as your father?— A. Y^es, sir. 

Q. You were told that he was your father? — A. Yes, sir. That was all I 
knew about it. Then folks begun to tell me back there. 

Q. AVhat (lid they say? — A. " That man is not your papa. Your father's name 
was Allen." 

Q. You say you don't remember the given name of this Allen, your father? — 
A. No, sir ; I don't. 

Q. You know anything about where he lived ? — A. No, sir ; I don't. 

Q. Do you know when he died? — A. No; I don't. 

Q. You don't know whether he had any brothers? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Or their names? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You don't know whether he had any sisters? — A. No, sir; I don't. 

Q. You said you had no idea where he lived? — A. No; I don't. 

Q, You remember your mother? — A. Yes, sir. I remember her complexion. 
She was brighter than I. 

Q. What color do you call yourself? — A. I calls myself brown skin. 

Q. What color was Bart Holmes?— A. My stepfather? 

Q. The man you call your stepfather? — A. I would call him brown skin. He 
is blacker than I is. 

Q. Your mother has negro blood?— A. Yes; she had negro blood. 

Q. She lived with negroes? — ^A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Your husband is a negro?— A. Yes, sir; he is. He's a negro. He's blacker 
than me. 

Q. What do you call blacker than you?— He's darker than me, but not negro 
black. 

Q. Dark brown? — A. Yes, dark brown. 

Q. Colored like a ginger cake left in the stove too long?— A. He ain't black, 
he's brown skin. 

Q. You have made application before some one for enrollment as a citizen by 
blood of the Choctaw Nation? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Before whom did you make this application? — A. Sir? 

Q. Before whom did you make this application? — A. Mr. Rodkey. 

Q. Mr. Perry Rodkey? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you ever see INIr. Perry Rodkey? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. WasMr. Perry Rodkey here? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Wliere did you see Mr. Rodkey?— A. Down at— I believe it was Okemah, 
I believe — I think it was Okemah. 

Q. Did you go to Okemah to see him. — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What made you go to see Mr. Rodkey. Had some one been to your home 
to see you about being enrolled?— A. They were talking to me— they said, 
" How come you don't go to try to get on the rolls?" 

Q. Who said this? — A. Mr. — that black man that swear for me. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 371 

Q. Mr. Wilson? — A. Yes, Mr. Wilson. 

Q, A notary public who lives on Archer Street, Tulsa? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. 619 Archer Street. — A. I don't remember the number. 

Q. I stated to you that you had made application for enrollment as a Choctaw 
citizen by blood. After looking over your application I note that you ask 
for enrollment as a Choctaw freedman instead of a Choctaw citizen by blood? — 
A. Yes. 

Q. Do you know about how old your mother was at the time she died? — A. No, 
I do not. 

Q. Was your mother a slave? — A. A slave; what do you mean? 

Q. Was she a slave at any time during slavery? — A. I don't know whether 
she was or not. She was working for these people. 

Q. Do you know whether your father was a slave? — A. No, I don't know that. 

Q. You state in your application that your father's name was Bart Allen, 
l^ou state to me that you do not remember the given name of your father. 
How about this? — A. Well, I really don't know the name of my own papa. I 
gave Holmes as my papa. The old man, the old gentleman, I calls grandpa, 
he told me about my father. His name — it was Bart, or something like that. 
He told me about my father before I went over there. 

Q. As a matter of fact, your information was that your father and mother 
were never married, isn't that true? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Isn't it true that your mother and father were never married?— A. I don't 
know. 

Q. Isn't that what you have been told ? — A. No ; no one ever told me that. 

Q. Isn't that the fact? — A. No one ever told me that. 

Q. Was your mother enrolled as a Choctaw freedman? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Did your mother have any brothers? — A. If she did, I didn't know anything 
about him. 

Q. Did your mother have any sisters? — A. If she did, I don't know. 

Q. Know anything about your mother's father? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Your mother's mother? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You don't know anything relative to your mother being enrolled as a freed- 
man, a Choctaw freedman? — A. No; I don't. 

Q. Do you know whether your father had any brothers or sisters? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know who your father's father was? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know who your father's mother was? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know anything about Kizzie Allen? — A. They said that she was my 
aunt. 

Q. Do you know anything about this Kizzie Allen? — ^A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know where she lived?— A. The last time I heard of my aunt she 
was living down in Choctaw Nation. It has been a year since I heard about her. 

Q. What place in Choctaw Nation? — A. Down in about — what county is that — 
that Idabel's in? 

Q. McCurtain County? — A. That's the last county I heard of her. That 
place 

Q. Do you know how far she lived from Idabel? What her post-office address 
is? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether she was enrolled? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You call her your aunt?- — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was she aunt on your mother or father's side? — A. My father's side. 

Q. Do you know who told you that? — A. First one, then another. I paid 
little attention to it. 

Q. Have you been married more than one time? — A. I'es, sir. 

Q. What was your husband's name? — A. Charley Swan. 

Q. Where did you marry him? — A. At Ardmore. 

Q. Do you know what vear or what date vou married him? — A. I think it was 
1903. 

Q. Did you get a license? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Married by a preacher? — A. Yes, sir ; married by a preacher. 

Q. What was his name? — A. Rev. Ilall. 

Q. Do you know who were the witnesses? — A. I can't remember who was the 
witnesses. 

Q. What name did you marry Swan under? — A. Under my second father's 
name. 

Q. What was that — Holmes? — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. As a matter of fact you were nhv.iys known from your girlhood up to 
the time you were married to Swan as Emily Holmes? — A. Yes, sir. 



372 - INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 

Q. You never were known by the nnnie of Allen? Never told that was your 
name? — A. No. sir; never what I was told. 

Q. You never went by the name of Allen at any time? — A. No, sir. 

Q. How long did you live with Swan? — A. Until the following year. He died. 

Q. Where did he die? — A. He got killed at Ardmore. 

Q. Did you live in the town of Ardmore? — A. In the country — 7 or 8 miles 
west on a farm. 

Q. Whose farm? — A. Native persons. I think his name was Humley,' or 
Humby — something like that. 

Q. Did you stay there after your husband died? — A. No. sir. 

Q. Did your hu.sband liave any brothers?— A. Y'es, sir. He had a brother. 

Q. Wliat was his name? — A. He had one brotlier. His name was Lewis 
Swan. 

Q. Where did he live? — A. In town. 

Q. Where is he now? — A. Haven't Iieard from liini since I left there. 

Q. What was his occupation? — A. Nothing much. 

Q. Gambling? — A. I don't Ivuow what he did. 

Q. Bootlegging? — A. Not as I know. Don't know what he did. 

Q. Did he have any sisters? — A. If he did I didn't know it. 

Q. Have you any children? Any cliildren by Swan? — A. No, sir. 

Q. After Swan died wlio was your next husband? — A. The one I have got 
now. 

Q. Wlien did you marry him? — A. Married him the following year after he 
died. 

Q. Do you know what year?— A. I married Charley in 1903. He died 1904. 
About 1905 I married this other fellow. 

Q. What was his name? — A. Collumbus Mills. 

Q. You married here in the city? — A. No; Oklahoma City. 

Q. Married by license? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who married you — a preacher? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know the name of the preacher? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know the number of the house wliere you were married? — A. No, 
sir; I don't. 

Q. Don't know whose residence it was? — A. Where I was married at? 

Q. Y^es. — A. The preacher had a l)ai-ber shop, and we were married in a 
little old back room ; the only thing I can tell you about it. Had a barber shop 
in front. 

Q. Do you know what street it was on? — A. No, sir ; I don't. 

Q. Y''ou have been living with this hu.sband ever since? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How many children have you? — A. I have one. 

Q. What is the name of that child?— A. Mary Mills. 

Q. Do you know the date of her birth? — A. Near as I can come at it, I sup- 
pose — I married him in 190.3, and she was born in 19 — . Well, I can't tell 
what year my child was born. I married him in 190.") — this one I got now. In 
1906, the following year, my child was born. 

Q. Have you had any otlier children? — A. No, sir. 

Q. How about this Lonnie? — A. Dead, rigiit after it was born. 

Q. Do you know what year that was? — A. My kids followed pretty close. 
Mary born in 190.1. Aliout 1907 I had that other one. 

Q. You have furnished the affidavits of G. W. Wilson and Nelson T. Tolbert 
in support of your petition filed by Webster Ballinger. How long has Mr. 
Wilson known you? — A. I have known Mr. Wilson a long, long time. 

Q. What do you mean by long, long time"? — A. I guess ever since I can 
remember I got acquainted with him. 

Q. Living in Idabel? — A. No, sir; down near there. In the country down 
there. 

Q. Did he know your mother? — A. I couldn't tell. 

Q. Do you remember him down there? — A. Yes, .sir. 

Q. How long have you known Nelson Tolbert? — A. I been knowing him since 
I been getting big enough to know him ; I know old grandpa. I always called 
him grandpa. Grandpa Tolliver. 

Q. Do you know whether Wilson knew your father? — A. No, I don't know. 

Q. Do you know whether Tolbert knew your father? — A. I suppose he did; 
I don't know. 

Q. Do you know whether your mother ever applied for enrollment as Choc- 
taw freedman? — A. No, I don't know that. 

Q. Do you know whether she died prior to the time tliey were being enrolled 
by the Dawes Commission? — A. I don't know that. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 373 

Q. Do you suppose that you were 6 or 8 years old when your mother died? — 
A. I suppose so, by uie remembering her. To tell the truth I remember my 
mother all right. Itemember her color. 

Q. I show you a photograph attached to your petition for enrollment, filed 
by Mr. Webster Ballinger. Is that your picture? — A. Yes, that's my picture. 
Looks better than I look. 

Q. Who was it who told you to fix your hair that way, so that it shows how 
straight and long it is?— A. The people what went up to have their pictures 
taken. Tliey came by. I said "Where you all going?" They said, "Come 
along and have your picture taken." 

Q. Did you have to pay any person to fix up these papers for you? — A. Did 
I have to pay for having these pictures taken? 

Q. No, these papers ?^A. Yes, sir, we paid. 

Q. To whom did you pay the money? And how much did you pay? — A. To 
tell you the truth I don't just remember what I did pay. Remember I did pay 
something, but don't remember wliat it was. 

Q. The papers were signed before Chas. E. Guthrie? — A. That's the man I 
paid it to. The man that did the stenographer's work. I gave him some 
money, but I don't just remember what I gave him. 

Q. Don't you remember how much? — A. I handed him a $5 bill and I don't 
just remember wiiat he handed me back out of that $5 bill. 

Q. Did you promise to pay him or any other person anything in addition? — 
A. No, sir. I never made any promise. 

Q. Did you sign any contract to pay anything in case this application was 
allowed? — A. No, sir. 

Q. This man Guthrie, is he a white man? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is he the man who first saw you about making this application? — A. I 
never saw him until I went to that place, until I went to Okemah that day. 

Q. You went, then, to see Mr. llodkey and you found Mr. Guthrie there? — A. 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did he make out this petition, at Okemah?— A. Yes, sir. I suppose 
he did. I went to see him down there. 

Q. That is where you signed these papers? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you see Mr. Guthrie in Tulsa? — A. I never met Mr. Guthrie here in 
Tulsa. 

Q. That is all the money that you have paid out? What you told me? — 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. No other sum w^as demanded of you? — A. No other sum demanded. 

Q. Do you know whether you signed any other kind of a contract? — A. I 
signed something 

(). Was it read to you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was the nature of the paper? — A. It was about trying to get my 
rights. 

Q. Were you given a copy of it? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know where your mother was born? — A. When? 

Q. No. Where was she born? — A. Down in the Nation, I suppose. 

Q. You don't know? — A. I don't know, to tell the truth. 

Q. Do you know where your father was born? — A. No, sir, I do not. 

Q. Do you know how long your mother was a resident of the Choctaw Na- 
tion? — A. No, sir, I do not. 

Q. Do you know how long your father was a resident of the Choctaw Na- 
tion? — A. No, sir, I don't. 

Q. Do you know whether either one was a slave? — A. No, sir, I don't. 

Witness excused. 

State of Oklahoma, 
County of Tulsa, ss. 
IVIildred W. Kelsey, being first duly sworn, states that as stenographer to 
the national attorney for the Choctaw Nation, she ret)orted the proceedings 
in the above entitled cause on the 17th day of November, 1915, and that the 
foregoing is a true and correct transcript of her stenographic notes thereof. 

Mii.DKEi) W. KET.sp:y. 
Subscribed and sworn to before me this 3d day of December, 1915. 
[seal.] Faruar Smith, 

Notary Public. 
[My commission expires Sept. 9, 1918.] 



374 IXDTAN APPROPRIATION P.TLL. 

Dei'aktm?:nt of the Interior, 
Ofmck ok the Sttpekintexdknt i"ou the Five Civilized Tribes, 

Titlsa, OJda., November 27, 1015. 
Ill the nintlcr of (ho ixpi)licati()u for enrollinoiit of Emily Mills, nee Allen, as 

a Choctaw freednian. 
Nelson TolI»ert, bein.!; first duly sworn by INIildrod W. Kelsey, a notary public 
in and for the county of Tulsa, State of Oklahoma, on oath testified as follows: 

p]xamination by Mr. P. J. Hurley : 

Q. What is your name? — A. Nelson Tolbert. 

Q. How old are you? — A. 58 years old last January. 

Q. Do you know p]mily ]Mills. nee Allen? — A. Yes, sir; I know tliem and 
her mother. 

Q. Who was her mother? — A. All I do know. That's all I do know. I start 
that right at the .lump. 

Q. Her father was Bart Allen? Was her father Bart Allen and her mother 
Mary Allen? — A. That is all I know about them. 

Q. Where did her parents live? — A. I couldn't tell what town they lived in. 
They lived about. 

Q. Do you know where they lived in the Choctaw Nation? — A. I know they 
was in the Choctaw Nation. I don't know whereabouts. 

Q. Who told you they were in the Choctaw Nation? — A. I seen them there. 

Q. When? — A. T couldn't tell just how long ago it has been. Good long 
time ago. 

Q. bo you know whether any of their relatives are enrolled as Choctaw citi- 
zens? — A. I don't know. I just tell you 

Q. How long ago has it been since tliey lived in the Choctaw Nation? — A. I 
don't know. 

Q. Where did they live in the Choctaw Nation? — A. I don't know exactly 
what town ; they lived close by. Didn't live in town, as far as I can remember 
now. Don't know whereabouts they lived. 

Q. How old were you when you knew them? — A. I guess I was about 27 or 28. 

Q. Where were you living in the Choctaw Nation?— A. I was in the country, 
wouldn't live in town. 

Q. What river or creek did you live by? — A. Little creek they called Boggy 
where I was living at that time. 

Q. Clear Boggy or IVIuddy Boggy? — A. I believe it was called Muddy Boggy. 

Q. There ort two creeks, one called Clear Boggy and one called IMuddy 
Boggy? — A. ]\Iuddy Boggy is the one. 

Q. WMiat town does Muddy Boggy run by? — A. I don't know. 

Q. WHiere did you do your trading? Where did you buy your groceries? — 
A. Caddo. 

Q. Then you claim these people lived clo.se to Caddo? — A. Guess that must 
have been the town I traded at. 

Q. Do you know when they left the Choctaw Nation? — A. No. sir. 

Q. Would you swear that you knew when they left the Choctaw Nation? — 
A. No, sir. 

Q. AVhen did you leave the Choctaw Nation? — A. I couldn't tell what year T 
left the Choctaw Nation. Good while I have been in Creek Nation — I have 
l)een in Creek Nation 12 or 14 years. 

Q. Where did you live before you came to the Creek Nation? — A. I come 
Irom down below Caddo. 

Q. In th? Choctaw Nation or Texas? — A. In the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. How long had you lived below Caddo? — A. I don't know how many years. 

Q. You said you lived there when you were 27 years old: did you stay there 
until you came to the Creek Nation? — A. That's what I did. I have been here 
in this nation 14 years, in this nation. Don't know how many years back to 
make just how long I stayed in the Choctaw Nation at that time. 

Q. You are HS years old now? — A. And 15 from 58 

Q. 'Would be 43 when you left the Choctaw Nation, and you had lived at 
Caddo from the time you were 27 until you were 43? — A. I lived around Caddo 
quite a while. 

Q. Sixteen years? — A. I don't know how long. I don't know just how long 
it was. 

Q. How long has it been since you knew the Allen people at Caddo? — A. I 
forgotten that. 

Q. Is Ennly Allen a white person or a darkey? — A. Emily, she not a white 
person, becaiise her daddy was not a white man. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 375 

Q. Wns her father a nesro? — A. Her father was an Indian. 

Q. \\hi\t was her mother? — A. A half hreed. 

Q. Half what else? — A. I don't know what. Negro or white it was. 

Q. Were the parents of p]niily Allen ever married? — A. If they was, more 
than I Icnow. INIore than I can rememher right now. 

Q. Wliere does Emily Allen live now? — A. Here in Tulsa. 

Q. What was the name of hor father?— A. Bart Allen. 

Q. What relation are yon to Emily Allen?-^A. Who? Me? T don't know. 

Q. Does she call you grandpa ? — A. If she do, just a nickname. 

Q. You say she lived at Caddo? That she lived at Caddo when you knew 
her? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How would you explain it if she said she lived at Idabel? — ^A. Well, it 
might have been. I knew her at Caddo. I knew her at both places. 

Q. Was her mother married twice? — A. I don't know whether she was mar- 
ried twice or not. 

Q. As a matter of fact, Emma Allen's name was not Allen at all? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you sure of that? — A. What the old folks said. 

Q. Who" told you that?— A. Her mother. 

Q. Did she have a stepmother? — A. Had a stepfather. 

Q. Married to a negro? Is she married to a negro? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Does she live with negroes all the time? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did her mother live with negroes all the time? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know Kizzie Allen? — A. Kizzie Allen. I know of her. I don't 
think I know her ; don't know her personally. 

Q. Was she an Indian or negro? — A. I don't l\;now. 

Q. You don't know whether her mother was an Indian or negro? — A. I told 
you her mother was half-breed negro — half breed and half Indian. 

Q. Who told you ? — A. She said so. 

Q. What was her father?— A. Full-blood Indian? 

Q. Who told you he was a full-blood Indian? A full-blood Creek?— A. A full- 
blood Choctaw, not Creek. 

Q. Do you know whether her father and mother were ever married? — A. No 
more than what I heard them say. They said they were married. Don't know 
positive. 

Q. How much did she pay you for making this affidavit? — A. Nothing. 

Q. How much is she going to pay you? — A. Never offered me nothing, never 
cliarged her nothing. 

Q. You do not know whether these folks are Indian or not, do you? — A. They 
said they was Indian. Looks like these Indians I see her walking around 
here 

Q. You are not in the Choctaw Nation— A. I sees lots of Choctaw men, 
Indians 

Q. Who have you seen up here? — ^A. I don't know their names, not more 
than a cat. I have seen them liere. 

Q. You know they — How do you know they were Choctaw Indians? — A. I 
know by their looks. 

Q. Do you know the difference between Choctaws, Chickasaws, Cherokees 

A. If you get them all together I can just show you once. 

Q. Can you speak the Choctaw language? — A. No kind; no more than wliat I 
am talking — that what you hear me talking. 

Q. You don't know anything about the parents of this Allen woman, except 
her mother claimed to be one-half negro — half-breed Indian and half negro? — 
A. Her father was a full-blood Choctaw. 

Q. What was her father's name? — A. Bart Allen. 

Q. You don't know whether her father and mother were ever married? — A. 
All I kno\v they said they were maried. I didn't see them. They were living 
together. 

Witness excused. 

Mildred W. Kelsey, being first duly sworn, states that as stenographer to the 
national attorney for the Choctaw Nation she reported the proceedings in the 
above-entitled case on the 27th of November, 1915, and that the foregoing is a 
true and correct transcript of her stenographic notes thereof. 

MiLUKKU W. Kki.skv. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 4th diiy of December, 1915. 
[seal.] Farrar Smitu. 

[My conunission expires Sept. 9, 1918.] 



376 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

CASE NO. 5. 

Statement of P. J. Hurley, Attorney for the Choctaw Nation, in re Appli- 
cation OF .ToHN Harrison et al., fob Enrollment as Citizens by Blood of 
Choctaw Nation. 

pbjtition of .john harrison for the enrolljient of himself and family and 
fob his brothers and sisters and their families as choctaw indians 

BY BLOOD. 

Comes now John Harrison and shows that he is 37 years of age and that he 
lives at Keefeton, Olvla. 

That lie is a Choctaw Indian hy birth, by blood, by descent, and by residence ; 
that he is the son of W. J. Sloan Harrison, who was a Choctaw Indian by 
blood and a resident of the Choctaw Nation prior to June 28, 1898 ; and that 
all the applicants herein mentioned were residents of the Choctaw Nation from 
their births and have lived either in the Choctaw or Chiclcasaw Nation. 

That the said W. J. Sloan Harrison was the brother of William H. Harrison, 
whose name appears on the approved roll of Choctaw citizens opposite 7663 ; 
and Robert Harrison, who is also enrolled No. 12175. 

That on the 6th day of April, 1901, he was duly and lawfully married to T.aura 
Harrison, with whom he still lives ; that there was born to this union the fol- 
lowing named children, to wit : Henry Harrison, age 14 years ; Kennith Harri- 
son, born December 6, 1902 ; Benjamin Harrison, born November 1, 1904. 
Son of W. J. Sloan Harrison. 

That the children of Sloan Harrison, for whom he appears in behalf, are 
Charley Harrison, age 17 years ; Randeen Harrison, age 1-5 years ; Willie May 
Harrison, age 12 years. Daughter of W. J. Sloan Harrison. 

That the children of Minnie Bowie, nee Hatcher, age 4.^ years, are Lou 
Tipton, age 20 years; Johnie Hatcher, age 19 years; Fannie Hatcher, age 18 
years ; Ada Hatcher, age 17 years ; Manda Hatcher, age 15 years. Daughter 
of W. ,T. Sloan Harrison. 

That the children of Lydia Williams, age 47 years, are Johnson Williams, 
age 29 years; Jesse Williams, age 27 years; Hattie Robbins, age 22 years; 
Fannie Thompson, age 20 years ; Roxie Flannagin, age 18 years ; Harrison 
Williams, age 16 years; Rosie Record, age 15 years, married to Chas. Record. 

Petitioner further shows that his said father, W. J. Sloan Harrison, had 
lived with the other Choctaw Indians as such and had occupied the public 
domain as such Choctaw Indian, but tliat he relied on his residence and Choc- 
taw Indian blood and did not make an application for the enrollment of himself 
and family until May 23, 1901. 

That prior to that date he had gone to the Dawes Commission and told them 
his circumstances and had been rebuffed and told that he must do things 
like other applicants and that his family, in the enjoyment of their citizen- 
ship and the occupation of their home, loft all the matters of enrollment to 
their said father, who refused to make any further fight for his rights than 
to just malce an application, which the Dawes Commission held was too late and 
that all the decision that he ever received was a " too late" decision, not based 
on his residence, but on his failure to prove that he was the descendent of a 
party tliat had made application to " Col. William Ward " for a reservation 
in IMississippi, when in truth and fact he had been living in the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nation for the last past 40 years in the full enjoyment of his said 
rights as a tenant in common with the other Choctaws. 

That the record of his application is hereto attaclied and made a part hereof, 
marked " Exhibit A." That the following sentence was gratuitously added to 
said record : 

"This n])j)licant has slight appearance of being Indian; is dark skinned, has 
high ch(>ek bones, sti-aight nose, but his hair is slightly curley at the ends." 

Petitioner fm-ther shows that their said father was not the only Choctaw 
Indian whose hair was slightly curley at the ends, and that that was not legal 
grounds for denying them of their rights as Choctaw Indians. 

That tliis ai)i)licant and no member of his said father's family, for whom he 
makes application, has ever been called on to pay a permit in either the 
Choctaw or Chickasaw Nation. 

That the applicants named herein did work with their said father in making 
their home on the i)ublic domain, and that he h:ul in cidtivation 200 acres, with 
three sets of improvements thereon, which he lived on for 40 years and held 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 377 

until he died and which tliese appliciints held until it was allotted away from 
them. 

Wherefoi'e petitioner prays that his name, John Harrison, and the names of 
his said children, Henry, Kennith, and Benjamin Harrison ; also the name of 
Sloan Harrison and his family, to wit, Charley, Randeen, and Willie Harrison ; 
also the name of Minnie Bowie and her said children, Lou Tipton, Johnie, 
Fannie, Ada, and Manda Hatcher ; also the name of Lydia Williams, his sister, 
and her children, to wit, Johnson and Jesse Williams, Hattie Rawlins, Fannie 
Thompson, Roxie Flannigan, and Harrison Williams and Rosie Record, be 
placed on the approved roll as Choctaw Indians by blood, and that to them 
and to each of them be given their distributive share of the common property 
of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians, the same as is given to all other Choctaw 
Indians by blood. 

John Harrison. 
State of Oklahoma, 

Muskogee County, ss: 
John Harrison, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is the above- 
named John Harrison ; that he has read over the above and foregoing petition 
and knows the contents thereof, and that the matters and things therein 
contained are true. 

John Harrison. 

Subscril)ed and sworn to before ine this the 5th day of March, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over the above petition to the afliant, and that he 
knew the contents thereof, and that he stated that same were true. 

Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 
My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION OF SLOAN HARRISON, IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF 
JOHN HARRISON, FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL., AS CHOCTAW 
INDIANS. 

Comes now Sloan Harrison and shows that he is 39 years of age, and that 
he lives in Muskogee, Okla., at 803 South Eighth Street. 

That he is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, 
and by recognition, as is shown by the petition of John Harrison, his brother, 
made in his behalf, to which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That he lias read over said petition and knows the contents thereof, and 
that the matters and things therein contained he knows to be true of his own 
personal knowledge. 

That his present home is in Muskogee, but that he has just recently moved 
to Muskogee, and that prior to tliat time, which lias only been the last past 
two months, he has lived in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. 

Sloan Harrison. 
State of Oklahoma, 

Muslcoyee County, ss: 

Subscriljed and sworn to before me this the 6th day of IMarch, 1915. I 
further certify tliat I read over the above affidavit to the affiant, and that h^ 
knew the contents thereof, and that he stated that same was true, and that 
he has the identical person named therein as affiant. 

Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

My conmiission expires June 2, 1917. 



supplemental PETITION OF MINNIE BOWIE, n£e HATCHER, NtE HARRISON, IN 
SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF .lOlIN HARRISON FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF 
ET AL. AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Comes now Minnie Bowie, nOa Hatcher, nee Harrison, and shows that she 
is 40 years of age, and that she lives at No. 818^ South Second Street, Musko- 
gee, Okla. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian l)y birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, 
and l)y recognition, as is sliown by the petition of her brother, John Harrison, 
made in her behalf, to which this petition is attached and made a part. 



378 INDIAN APPROPRTATTON BTLL. 

Tlmt slie has road over said petition and knows the contents thereof and 
tliat the matters and things contained tlierein are true. 

Tliat on the 20th day of December, 1905, she was duly and lawfully married 
to Mose Bowie, with whom she still lives. 

That prior to this said marriage she was the legal wife of Henry Thatcher, 
to which union the following named children were born : Lou Tipton, age 20 
years; Johnie Hatcher, age 19 years; Fannie Hatcher, age IS years; Ada 
Hatcher, aged 17 years; Manda Hatcher, aged 1.5 years. 

That all of said children are alive and all the minors live with applicant at 
the above-stated place of residence. 

Petitioner further shows that she, with the other members of her said 
father's family, were all born and raised on the public domain with all the 
rights and privileges of other Choctaw Indians ; that they all depended on 
their said father to enroll the family, which he was slow about doing, and was 
compelled to make an application in 1891 as a Mississiiipi Choctaw, which 
included this applicant and her said family, and that the decision was rendered 
against them because they could not prove that they had complied with the 
fourteenth article of the treaty of 1S30 made between the United Slates and 
the Choctaws in Mississippi; when in truth and in fact this applicant and all 
of her said family were born in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, and 
had always lived on the public domain and enjoyed all the rights and privileges 
of other Choctaw Indians, her said father, F. J. Sloan Harri.son, having a1 
that time resided in the Choctaw Nation' for more than 40 years and had al 
the time of his death more than 200 acres in cultivation, and as resident 
Choctaws they were all entitled to enrollment. 

That her name and the names of her said children appear in the petition of 
her said brother, John Harrison, at her request, and that she hereby ratifies 
and confirms the same. 

Minnie Bowie (her thumb print). 

The name of Minnie Bowie was written by me at her request and in her 
presence, and mark made by her in my presence. 
Julius Golden, Witness to Mark. 
Attest : 

M. M. LiNDLY, Wittiess to Mark. 
State of Oklahom.\, 

Miiskogee County, ss: 
Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 25th day of March, 1915. 1 
further certify that I read over the al>ove petition to the affiant and that she 
knew the contents thereof, and that she stated that same was true and that 
she was the identical person named therein as petitioner. 

Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 
]\Iy commission expires June 2, 1917. 



SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION OF LOU TIPTON, IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF JOHN 
HARRISON FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

* 

Comes now Lou Tipton and shows that she is 20 years of age, and that she 
lives at 705 South Eighth Street, Muskogee, Okla. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, 
and by r(>cognition, as is shown by the petition of John Harrison, her uncle, 
made in her behalf, to which this petition is attached and made a jiart. 

That she has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof, and that 
Ihe matters and things therein contained with reference to her relationship 
and residence and the relationship and residence of all the other parties named 
therein she knows to be true of her own knowledge; that the matters and 
things therein contained with reference to the ancestors of her said father she 
has always been taught were true; that she has also been told that they were 
true by reliable persons that were personally acquainted with the parties and 
knew the facts; and that she believes them to be true, and so charges the fact 
to be. 

Petitioner furtlun- shows that .she has been a minor during all the enrolling 
period of her said tribe ever since she was born, and that the rolls thereof were 
closed by the operation of law long prior to her reaching her majority. 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 379 

That HO proper application \\as made for her in due time and that on account 
of her minority slie was precluded from acting; that she now comes and claims 
the right due to all mipors after they reach iheir majority to recover what 
she was deprived of on account of her minority. 

That her name appears in the said petition of her said uncle at her request, 
and that she hereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in the prayer 
thereto appended. 

Lou Tipton (her thumb print). 

The name of Lou Tipton was written by me at her request and in her pres- 
ence and mark made by her in my presence. 
Julius Golden, 

Witness to Mark. 
Attest : 

M. M. LiNDLY, 

Witness to Mark. 
State of Oklahoma, 

j\[uskogce Comity, ss: 
Subscribed and sworn to before me this tlie 25th day of March, 19L5. I 
further cei-tify that I read over the above petition to the affiant and that she 
knows the contents thereof and that she stated that same was true, and that she 
was the identical person named therein as petitioner. 

Julius Golden, 

Notary Fublie. 
My commission expires ,Tune 2, 1917. 



SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION OF FANNIE HATCHER IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF 
JOHN HARRISON FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW 
INDIANS. 

Comes now Fannie Hatcher and shows that she is 18 years of age and that she 
lives at No. 8I82 South Second, Muskogee, Okla. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, 
and by recognition, as is shown by the petition of John Harrison, her uncle, 
made in her behalf, to wliich this petition is attached and made a part. 

That she has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof, and 
that the matters and things therein contained with reference to her relationship 
and residence and the relationship and residence of all the other parties named 
therein she knows to be true of her own knowledge ; that the matters and things 
therein contained with reference to the ancestors of her said parents she has 
always been taught were true ; that she has also been told that they were true 
by reliable persons that were well and personally acquainted with the parties 
and knew the facts, and that she believes them to be and so charges the fact 
to be. 

Petitioner further shows that during the entire enrolling period of her said 
tribe, since she was born, she was a minor ; that she has just reached her 
majority, and that the rolls have long since been closed by operation of law ; 
that at the time of the passing of said law this applicant w^as old enough to 
have been enrolled and allotted, but that no proper petition was made for her 
in time by her said father; that her said tribe never enrolled her. and the Dawes 
Commission likewise left her off the rolls, and having readier her majority she 
now asks to be restored to the property that she was deprived of while she was 
a minor. 

That her name appears in the said petition of her said uncle at her request, 
and that she iiereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in the prayer 
thereto appended. 

Fannie Hatcher. 
State of Oklahoma, 

Muskogee County, ss: 

Sub.scribed and sworn t<j before nie this the 2ritli day of Ararch, 191."). I fur- 
ther certify that I read over and fully explained to the afiiant the above and 
foregoing petition and that sIk; knew the contents thereof and that she stated 
that same was true and that she was the identical person named therein as 
petitioner. 

Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



380 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

SUPPLEifENTAL PETITION OF I.YDIA WILLIAMS IN SUPPOKT OF THE PETITION OF 
JOHN HARRISON FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAWS BY 
BLOOD. 

Comes now Lydia AVilliains and shows that she is 41 years of ajxe and that 
she lives at Mead, Okla. 

That slie is a Choctaw Indian by birtli, by blood, by descent, by residence, 
and by recognition; that the same is shown by the petition of John Harrison, 
her brother, made in her behalf, to which this petition is attached and made 
a part. 

That she has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof, and 
that the matters and things therein contained are true. 

That she has been recognized as a Choctaw Indian ever since she could re- 
member, having been born and rai.sed in the Choctaw Nation. 

That on the day of , 1885, she was duly and lawfully married to 

Sam Williams, with whom she still lives. 

That there was born to this union the following named children: Johnson 
Williams, age 29 years ; Jesse Williams, age 27 years ; Hattie Robins, age 22 
years; Fannie Thompson, age 20 years; Roxie Flannigan, age 18 years; Harri- 
son Williams, age 16 years; Rosa Williams, age 1.5 years. 

That all of the above named children are alive, and that all of them were 
born and raised in the Choctaw Nation. 

That applicant further states that she and all of her said, family have always 
been recognized as Choctaw Indians ; that she built her home on the public 
domain 1 mile northwest of Mead, Okla. 

That she and her said husband and family cleared up 80 acrose of land 
and built improvements thereon and lived on same for more than 20 years, 
when it was allotted away from them. 

That the above home joined 200 acres that her said father, W. J. Sloan 
Harrison, put in cultivation, which he lived on until he died. 

Tliat when she made application for enrollment she was too late to be en- 
I'olled. That she acted as a citizen, was recognized as a Choctaw citizen, and 
really thought that she had done all that was necessary for the enrollment ol 
herself and family. 

That slu^ now prays that her name and the names of her said children, as 
stated in the petition of her said brother, John Harrison, be placed on the 
approved roll of Choctaw citizens by blood, and that to them and to each of 
them be given their distributive share of the common property of the Choctaw 
Tribe of Indians as prayed for in said petition. 

Lydia Williams (her x mark). 

State of Oklahoma, County of Bryant, ss: 

Subscrilied and sworn to before me this the 2Gth day of March, 1915. I fur- 
ther certify that I read over and fully explained the contents of the above 
petition to the affiant and that she knew the contents thereof and that she 
stated that same was true and that she was the identical person named therein 
as affiant. 

[seal.] G. O. Reves, 

Notary Public. 

]My commission expires January 25, 1919. 



SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION OF JOHNSON AVILLIAMS IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION 
OF JOHN HARRISON FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW 
INDIANS. 

Comes now Johnson Williams and shows that he is 29 years of age, and 
that he lives at 802 South Eighth Street, Muskogee, Okla., where he has lived 
for the last past two years ; that prior to that time he lived in the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations, where he was born. 

That he is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, and 
by recognition, as is sliown by the petition of John Harrison, his uncle, the 
brother of this applicant's mother, made in his behalf, to which this petition is 
attached and made a part. 

That he has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof and that 
the matters and things therein contained with reference to his relationship and 
residence and the relationship and residence of all the other parties named 
therein he knows to be true of his own knowledge ; that the matters and things 
therein contained with reference to the ancestors of his said parents he has 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 381 

always been taught were true; that he has also been told that they were true 
by reliable parties that were personally acquainted with the parties and knew 
the facts, and that he believes them to be true, and so charges the fact to be. 

That the reason that his name is not on the final roll of Choctaws is that 
during the entire enrolling period since he was born he was a minor, and 
that the roll was closed by operation of law before he reached his majority, 
although he was old enough to have been enrolled and allotted. 

That he is therefore deprived of his share of the common property of his 
tribe of Indians for the sole reason that he was a minor. 

Wherefore petitioner prays tliat his name, Johnson Williams, be placed on 
the approved roll of the Choctaw Nation as prayed for in the said petition of 
his said uncle, which said petition he hereby ratifies and confirms. 

Johnson Williams. 
State of Oklahoma, 
Aluskogce County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this, the 19th day of March, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over said petition to athdavit and that he knew 
the contents thereof and that he stated that same was true and that he was- 
the identical person named therein as affiant. 

Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION OF JESSE WILLIAMS IN SUPPOKT OF THE PETITION OF 
JOHN HAPvEISON FOPv THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW INDIANS 
BY BLOOD. 

Comes now Jesse Williams and shows that he is 27 years of age, and that 
he lives at 709 South Fourteenth Street, Muskogee, Okla. 

That he has lived in Musokgee for the last past three years, and that prior 
to that time he had always lived in the Choctaw Nation, where he was born. 

That he is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence^ 
and by recognition, as is shown by the petition of John Harrison, his uncle, 
made in his behalf, to which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That he has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof and that 
the mattei-s and things therein contained with reference to his relationship 
and residence and the relationsliip and residence of all the other parties named 
therein, he knows to be true. of his own knowledge; that the matter and things 
therein contained with reference to the ancestors of his said parents, he has 
always been taught were true ; that he has also been told that they were true 
by reliable persons that they were personally acquainted with the parties and 
l<ne\v the facts, and that he believes them to be true and so charges the fact 
1o be. 

That he has been recognized as a Choctaw Indian ever since he could re- 
member, having been I)orn and raised in the Choctaw Nation. 

Tiiat his name appears in the said petition of his said uncle at his request, 
and that he hereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in the prayer 
thereto appended. 

Jessie Williams. 
State of Oklalioma, 
Mnskogee County, ss. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the ISth day of I\Iai-ch. 1915. I 
furtlier certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant and that he 
knew the contents thereof .and that he stated that same was true and that he 
was the identical person named therein as affiant. 

, Notary Public. 



SUPPLE5[ENT petition of HATTIK KOmUNS, Nf;E WILLIAMS, IN SUPPORT OF THE 
PETITION OF JOHN HARRISON FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HlifSELF ET AL. AS CHOC- 
TAW INDIANS. 

Comes now Ilattie Robbins and shows that she is 22 years of age, and that 
she lives at 734 Indianapolis Street, ]\Iuskogee, Okla. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian by l)irth, by bh)od, by descent, by residence, 
and by recognition, as is shown by the petition of John Harrison, to which this 
petition is attached and made a part. 



382 INDIAN APPKOrKIATION BILL. 

That she has i-ead over said petition and Iviiows the contents thereof and 
that the matters and things therein contained with reference to lier relation- 
sliip and residence and residence and the relationship of all the other parties 
named therein as descendants of the said John Harrison, she knows to he true 
of her own knowledge ; that the matters and things therein contained with ref- 
erence to the ancestors of her said father she has always been taught were 
true ; that she has also been told that they were true by reliable persons that 
were personally acquainted with the parties and knew the facts, and that she 
believes them to be true and so charges the fact to be. 

That on the 15th day of October, 1908, she was duly and lawfully married 
to Louis llobbins, with whom she still lives; that they were married at her 
home in the Choctaw Nation, and that her said husband brought her to Mus- 
kogee. 

That she has been a recognized Choctaw ever since she could remember, 
liaving been born and raised in the Choctaw Nation, on the home of her said 
mother, Lydia Williams, which she and her husband and her family occupied, 
and where she lived until it was allotted away from her. 

That she was a minor during all the years of the enrolling period of her 
tribe since she was born, and that long before she reached her majority the 
rolls were closed by operation of law ; that, although she was long past old 
enouah to have been enrolled and allotted, she was neglected by her father, dis- 
regarded by her tribe, and omitted by the Dawes Commission ; that she is 
therefore deprived of her distributive share of the common property of her said 
tribe sonely on account of her minority, and she now prays to be restored to 
the rights then due to her. 

That her name appears in the said petition of John Harrison, her uncle, at 
her request, and that she hereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in 
the prayer thereto appended. 

Hattie Robins. 
State of Oklahoma, 

Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 29th day of March, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over the above petition to the atliant and that she 
knew the contents thereof and that she stated that same was true and that she 
was the identical person named therein as petitioner. 

Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

My conunission expires June 2, 1917. 



affidavit of peter nail in support of the petition of JOHN HARRISON FOR THE 
ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Peter Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 67 years of age, 
and that he lieves at Wagoner, Okla. 

That he is well and personally acquainted with all the applicants and know 
them to be Choctaw Indians by descent, by blood, and by residence. 

That the applicants are the children of W. J. Sloan Harrison, who always 
claimed to be a half-blood Choctaw Indian. 

That he lived right close to the line of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
until he died, and that he always lived on a home of his own on the public 
domain, which he held as a Choctaw Indian. 

That after allotment this place was allotted to other parties because the 
Dawes Commission refused to enroll him. 

All that I know about this that the applicant, W. J. Sloan Harrison, told me 
that they wanted to enroll him as a freedman and that he refused to accept 
it and they turned him down. 

Affiant further states that he knows from other parties that these applicants 
had been living there in the Choctaw Nation a long time before he knew them 
personally and that he has known them personally for the last 16 years. 

Peter Nail Hiis thumb print). 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 383 

The name of Peter Nail was written by me at liis request and in liis presence 
and mark made by him in my presence. 

Attest : 

Julius Golden, Witness to Mark. 
M. M. LiNDLY, Witness to Mark. 

State of Oklahoma, 

Muskogee County, ss: 
Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 4th day of March, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over and fully explained the contents of the above 
and foregoing affidavit to the affiant and that he knew the contents thereof 
and that he stated that the same was true and that he was the identical person, 
named therein as affiant. 

Julius Golden, Notary Public. 
My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



AFFIDAVIT OF ALEC NAIL IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF JOHN SLOAN HAKBISON 
FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Now comes Alec Nail, who being first duly sworn on oath states : That he is 
72 years of age, that his home is 3 miles west from Boggy Depot, Okla. 

That he is well and personally acquainted with the applicants and that he 
has known them in a way all their lives ; that he has not personally known 
them all the time, but that he did know their father since the convention at 
Old Boggy Depot, in 1869 ; that they both attended the said convention to- 
gether and that they have since lived a long distance apart but have met often 
enough to keep up a personal acquaintance with the father of the said appli- 
cants. He was W. J. Sloan Harrison. The reason that I kept up so close a 
personal acquaintance with him was that his trading point was Durant, 
Okla., and I lived in Durant. 

That it is for this reason that I knew him so much better than I did his 
family. Sometimes he had some of them with him and more often he came 
alono or with just his wife, Mahaley. 

I have been to his house and know that he had his own home on the public 
domain, the same as the other Choctaw Indians, and that he lived there until 
he died. 

No one ever was heard to dispute his right as a Choctaw Indian and he 
held land just the same as the other Choctaws and was so recognized. 

This continued until after allotment, and then he lost his farm because he 
was not enrolled. All I know about his making an application is what he told 
me, and that he said he made his application by blood, and for the reason that 
he had some negro blood in him, the commission wanted to put him on the 
freedmen roll, and he would not stand for it and the commission denied him. 

Alec Nail (his thumb print). 

The name of Alec Nail was written by me at his request and in his presence 
and mark made by him in my presence. 

Julius Golden, tvitness to mark. 
Attest : 

M. M. Lindley, witness to mark. 

State of Oklahoma, 

Muskogee County, ss: 
Subscribed and sworn to before me this, the 4th day of March, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over the above and foregoing petition to the affiant, 
and that he knew the contents thereof, and that he stated that same was true, 
and that he was the identical person named therein as affiant. 

Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 
My commission expires .lune 2, 1917. 



384 INDIAN APPEOPKIATION BILL. 

STATEMENT OF P. J. HURLEY, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHOCTAW NATION. 

In re application of John Harrison et al. for enrollment as citizens by blood of 

the Choctaw Nation. 

A copy of a petition was served upon me by Mr. Webster Ballinger, an attor- 
ney at law of Washington, D. C, as attorney for .John Harrison et al., who 
claim risbt to enrollment as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. In his 
petition John Harrison alleges that he and his family were applicants for 
enrollment as citizens of the Choctaw Nation at the time the rolls of citizen- 
ship were being prepared by the Dawes Commission ; that their application 
was denied for the reason that same was filed " too late." 

An examination of the record in this case discloses that John Harrison and 
all the applicants whose names appear in the copy of the petition served upon 
me by Mr. Ballinger were applicants for enrollment as Mississippi Choctaw 
citizens of the Choctaw Nation. To show the action taken in the various 
cases, I am attaching hereto photographic copies of census cards Nos. R2257, 
R4138, and R3834, marked " Exhibits A, B, and C, respectively. The rights 
of all the applicants in these cases were considered in case ISo. R2257. It 
appears that after full consideration the Commissioners to the Five Civilized 
Tribes rendered a decision in this case on July 22, 1902. A portion of said 
decision is as follows : 

" It further appears from the evidence submitted in support of said applica- 
tions and from the records in the possession of the commission, that no one 
of said applicants has ever been enrolled by the Choctaw tribal authorities as 
a member of the Choctaw Tribe or admitted to Choctaw citizenship by a duly 
constituted court or committee of the Cherokee Nation, or by the Commission 
to the Five Civilized Tribes, or by a decree of the United States court in 
Indian Territorv, under the provisions of the act of Congress approved June 
10, 1896 (29 Stats., 321). 

" It does not appear from the testimony and evidence offered in support of 
said applications, or from the records in the possession of the commission 
relating to persons who complied or attempted to comply with the provisions 
of said article 14 of the treaty of 1830, and to persons who heretofore were 
claimants thereunder, that the said W. J. Sloan Harrison, or any of the appli- 
cants herein, signified (in person or by proxy) to Col. Wm. Ward, Indian agent, 
Choctaw Agency, an intention to comply with the provisions of said article 14, 
or presented a claim to rights thereunder to either of the commissions author- 
ized to adjudicate such claims by the acts of Congress approved March 3, 
1837" (5 Stats., 180) and August 23, 1842 (Stats., 513). 

A complete and certified copy of the decision from which the above is quoted 
is attached hereto, marked Exhibit " C2." 

The evidence in the above case shows that these applicants claim to have 
emigrated from Alabama to Texas, and finally emigrated from Texas to Indian 
Territory. The evidence shows that W. J. Sloan Harrison, the first, is alleged 
by his descendants to have been a full-blood Choctaw Indian; that his wife, 
Lydia Harrison, was a negress; that W. J. Sloan Harrison, the second, was 
half negro and half Indian ; that his wife, Mahala Harrison, was a negress. 
The children of W. J. Sloan Harrison, the second, and INIahala Harrison would 
therefore be three-fourths negro blood. All of the children of this marriage 
appear to have married negroes. Their children would therefore be seven- 
eighths negro blood. I am attaching hereto a photographic copy of a diagram 
showing tl'e relationship of tlie applicants in this case and their alleged degree 
* of Indian blood, same being marked " Exhibit D." 

The only evidence of Indi.-in blood is contained in the testimony of the chief 
claimant, who made the uncorroborated statement that W. J. Sloan Harrison, 
The first, was a Choctaw Indian and resided in Alabama. These applicants 
claimed as Mississippi Choctaws less than full blood, and as such claimants 
they were requii'od to prove that their ancestors complied or attempted to com- 
ply with Ihe nHiuireinents of the foiuMoenth article of the treaty of 1830. This 
proof they could not furnish, nor could the Indian Ollico find any evidence in the 
record that the ancestors of these claimants had ever made any claim to citizen- 
shi]) in the Choctaw Nation, or had ever conqilied or attempted to comply with 
the requirements of the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830. There was no 
credible evidence that the applicants possessed any Indian blood, but if they 
did jMissess ^lississippi Choctaw blood, as claimed by them, they were not 
entitled, under the law, to enrollment in the Choctaw Nation for the reason 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 385 

that they had no evidence to offer to show that they were INIississippi Choc- 
taws, to wliom the risiht to reatliliate with the Choctaw Nation west had been 
reserved by tlie provisions of the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830. Under 
these circumstances the commission could not have justly done otherwise than 
to have rendered a decision denying their application, which decision was, as 
stated above, rendered on the 22d day of July, 1902. 

The petition otfered by Mr. Ballinger for John Harrison et al. is at variance 
with the facts shown by the records of the office in the case in which John Har- 
rison et al. were applicants for enrollment. The latest petition filed, however, 
is corroborated by the redoubtable Alec Nail, the old negro who signs his 
name by mark and who has faithfully served Mr. Ballinger and his associates 
as a professional witness in the corroboration of the statements taken in most 
every petition filed by Mr. Ballinger and his associates for persons claiming 
enrollment as citizens of the Choctaw Nation. Alec Nail's affidavit in this 
case is as follows: 

" NO. 5. CHOCTAW BY BLOOD. AFFIDAVIT OF ALEC NAIL IN SUPPORT OF THE PETI- 
TION OF JOHN HARRISON FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW 
INDIANS. 

" Comes now Alec Nail, who, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 
72 years of age ; that his home is 3 miles west from Boggy Depot, Okla. 

"That he is well and personally acquainted with the applicants and that he 
has known them, in a way, all their lives ; that he has not personally known 
them all the time, but that he did know their father since the convention at 
Old Boggy Depot, in 1869 ; that they both attended the said convention to- 
gether and that they have since lived a long distance apart but have met often 
enough to keep up a personal acquaintance with the father of the said appli- 
cants. He was W. J. Sloan Harrison. The reason that I kept up so close a 
personal acquaintance with him was that his trading point was Durant, Okla., 
and I lived in Durant. 

" That it is for this reason that I knew him so much better than I did his 
family. Sometimes he had some of them with him and more often he came 
alone or with just his wife Malialey. 

" I have been to his house and know that he had his own home on the public 
domain the same as the other Choctaw Indians and that he lived there until 
he died. 

" No one ever was heard to dispute his right as a Choctaw Indian and he held 
land just the same as the other Choctaws and was so recognized. 

" This continued until after allotment and then he lost his farm because he 
was not enrolled. All I Ivuow about his making an application is what he 
told me and that he said he made his application by blood and for the reason 
that he had some negro blood in him, the commission wanted to put him on 
the Freedmen roll, and he would not stand for it and the commission denied 
him. 

"Alec Nail (his thumb print)." 

" The name of Alec Nail was written by me at his request and in his pres- 
ence and mark made by him in my presence. 
" Julius Golden, Witness to mark. 
" M. M. LiNDLY, Witness to mark.'" 
"Attest : 
" State of Oklahoma, 
Muskogee County, ss: 
" Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 4th day of March, 1915 ; I 
further certify that I read over and fully explained the contents of the above 
and foregoing afl^davit to the affiant and that he knew the contents thereof 
and that he stated that the same was true and that he was the identical person 
named therein as affiant. 

" Julius Golden, 

" Notary Public." 
" My commission expires June 2, 1917." 



Alec Nail's affidavit in this matter is supported by the aflidavit of his 
brother, Peter Nail, who swears as fluently as Alec, and signs his affidavits by 
mark. In testifying before Mr. William L. Bowie, an officer of the Interior 

31362—16 25 



386 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Department, at Muskogee, Okla., on July 31. 1915, after hearing his affifhivit 
read Alec Nail was asked : 

"Q. What have you to say ahout this; do you know these persons? — A. I am 
better acciuaintcd with them since I have been in Muskogee. The old man was 
JialC Indian and half negro. 

"Q. Old man HarrLson claimed to be? — A. Half brother of Robert, William, 
and John Harrison, and I know them to be Indians and they claimed to be 
related to them. 

"Q. Did you know this person who represented himself to be John Harrison 
named in the application for enrollment? — A. I expect I knew him. 

"Q. But you can not place him right now? — A. I guess I would know him. 

"Q. Did you know him before you met him at the time he made this applica- 
tion? — A. Not to have identified him ; I met the old man when I lived at Durant. 

"Q. You mean these boys' father? — A. Yes. sir. 

"Q. AVhat was the name of their father? — A. John Harrison or Sloan. 

*'Q. You mean his surname was Sloan? — A. No; Harrison. 

"Q. Did they call him Sloan Harrison? — A. l"es. sir, and sometimes old man 
Harrison. 

"Q. Did you know enough aJ)out this man Harrison to testify as to who his 
parents were? — A. No, sir; my brother knew him; he was over here. 

"Q. Your brother is Peter Nail? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Were you ever at the home of the father? — A. Yes, sir; I have passed 
there a time or two. 

"Q. Was you ever at the home of the applicant in this case, John Harrison? — 
A. No, sir ; I don't know whether these young children had any home or not. 
The Choctaws just recognized them, 

"Q. You never had then a close personal acquaintance with the father of 
this applicant? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Was this applicant, John Harrison, a negro? — A. Yes. sir; sure. 

"Q. What is his color? — A. About mine, dark bay. 

"Q. What convention was it that met in 1869 at Boggy Depot? — A. That was 
w'hen the Government sent INIaj. Armstrong out there. 

"Q. Could you say that you met the father of this applicant at that conven- 
tion? — A. I don't remember. 

" Q. You do not remember whether you nuule such a statement ? — A. No, sir ; 
I don't. 

" Q. You do not remember whether the name of the father of these appli- 
cants was W. J. Sloan Harrison? — A. No, sir; I don't know; they claimed to be 
his children. 

" Q. You do not really know whether the full and correct name of the Har- 
rison you know was W. J. Sloan Harrison ; you do not know whether this is 
his correct name or not? — A. No, sir; I don't; they are Texas folks. 

"Q. Texas folks?— A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. Was the man that you have in mind, as the father of John Harrison, a 
negro? — A. No, sir; kind of an Indian-looking negro — about like my color." 

It will be noted in the alhdavit and the testimony of Alec Nail, and in the 
affidavit of Peter Nail, that W. J. Sloan Harrison, the second, was a recognized 
member of the Choctaw Nation, and held land the same as other Choctaws, and 
enjoyed all the privileges of Choctaw citizenship. At Atoka, Ind. T., on the 
28th day of May, 1901, W. J. Sloan Harrison, the second, appeared in person 
and testified. A part of his testimony is as follows: 

" Q. Have you ever been admitted to citizenship in the Choctaw Nation by 
the Choctaw tribal authorities, the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, or 
by judgment of the United States court in Indian Territory? — A. No, I aint 
been before them to have anything carried on like that." 

Again in the same testimony the witness was asked : 

" Q. Have you ever received any benefits as a Choctaw Indian? — A. No; just 
been working like the rest of them. 

" Q. Do you know what benefits mean? — A. I suppose yoii mean owning this 
land and using it. 

" Q. Or moneys? — A. No, I haven't got any money. 

"Q. Nor land?— A. No." 

Again in the same testimony : 

" Q. Have any of your ancestors ever i-eceived any benefits as Chotcaw In- 
dians? — A. No." 

This testimony appeai-s in case No. R22~}7, in re application of W. J. Sloan 
Harrison, et al. A complete and certified copy of said testimony is attached 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 



387 



hereto and marked " Exliibit E." This testimony is not only conclusive in 
showing that the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes did not err when it 
denied the rights of citizenship to the applicants in this case, but it also shows 
that the affidavits of Alec and Peter Nail, submitted by Mr. Ballinger in support 
of the petition now presented for the claimants, are false. 

On August 10, 1915, John Harrison, who is now the chief applicant in this 
case, appeared l)efore Mr. William L. Bowie, an offlcer of the Interior Depart- 
ment, and rendered full testimony in regard to his a])])lication, a copy of which 
testimony is attached here and marked " Exhibit F." This testimony is very 
interesting and shows clearly that the applicant is without legal, equitable, or 
moral right to enrollment as a citizen of the Choctaw Nation. To show the 
unreliability of the evidence, I need refer to only one feature. The witness 
testified as follows : 

" Q. How many brothers did you say your father had? — A. Two is all that 
I know. 

" Q. Name these two again. — A. Ilobert and ^^■illiam — I don't know for cer- 
tain, only what I have been taught." 

He later testifies that it is his understanding that William and Robert Harri- 
son are half brothers to his father, having the same father and different 
mothers. The enrollment records in the Indian Office show that the father of 
Robert and William Harrison was Zadoc Harrison. The records show that 
Zadoc Harrison was a full-blood Choctaw; that Robert, William, and John 
Harrison, his sons, who are referred to in these papers, are half Choctaw and 
half white. The records, when compared with the testimony, show that the 
claim of relationship to the Harrisons who are now on the rolls, made by these 
applicants, is a pure fabrication. No such relationship exists. 

In connection with this petition I refer also to petition No. 26, which is an 
application made by Angle Flanagan for enrollment as a citizen by blood of 
the Choctaw Nation. This petition was also submitted by Mr. Webster Bal- 
linger, as attorney for the claimant. Angle Flanagan is a daughter of Annie 
Ruth, who is shown by " Exhibit D " to be a granddaughter of W. J. Sloan 
Harrison, the second, and was denied ennillment as a Mississippi Choctaw in 
the case of W. J. Sloan Harrison, et al, iL C. R. 22.57. The facts and argument 
presented in the John Harrison case are applicable to the petition of this 
claimant. 

P. J. Hurley, 
National Attorney for the Choctaw Nation. 



Choctaw Nation; Sterrett, I. T.; MiKsisHijijii Choctatr Iii(Jiaiv-<: field No. R. 2257. 
(Stamped: Refused. Rejected.) 





Relation- 
ship to 
person 

first 
named. 


Age. 


Sex. 


Blood. 


Tribal enrollment of parents. 


Name. 


Name of father. 


Name of mother. 


1. Harrison, W. J. Sloan. 




65 
45 


M. 
F. 


J 
I. W. 


Sloan, H ar r ison 
(dead), claim Choc- 
taw. 

George Walker (dead), 
noncitizen. 


Lydia Sanders, non- 
citizen. 

Jane Walker (dead), 
noncitizen. 


2. Harrison, Mahala 


45 



Refer to M. C. R.-3832-3833-3834-383.5-4112-4137-4138. 

Decision rcndored July 22, 1902. 

Decision prepared June 13, 1902 (see testimony of May 23, 1901). 

Record forwarded the depart moiil July 22, 1902. 

Notice of decision forwanlcd :i.]i]ilieaiil July 22, 1902. 

Notice of decision mnilrd attorneys for Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations^ July 22, 1902. 

The application of the several persons herein for identification as Mississippi Choctaws refused in the 
decision in tlie case of W. J. Sloan Harrison et al., M. C. R. 2257 forwarded the Secretary of the Interior 
July 22, 1902. 

Action approved by Secretary of Interior October 23, 1902. 

Notice of (Ippartinenlal action mailed applicant Novembers, 1902. 

Notice of deparlnieiital iiction forwarded to attorneys for Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations November 8, 
1902. 



388 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 



Choctaw Nation; Sterrett, Ind. T.; Mississippi Choctmo Indians; field No. R. 
(Stamped: Refused. Rejected.) 





Relation- 
ship to 
person 

first 
named. 


Age. 


Sex. 


Blood. 


Tribal enrollment of parents. 


Name. 


Name of father. 


Name of mother. 


1. Harrison, John 




23 
16 


M. 
M. 


1 


Stone Harrison, claim 

Choctaw. 
No. 1 


Mahala Harrison non- 


2. Harrison, Henry 


Son 


citizen. 




citizen. 



1 Months. 

Refer to M. C. R. 2257. 

Decision prepared June 13, 1902. 

Decision rendered July 22, 1902. 

Record forwarded department July 22, 1902 (see testimony of November 21, 1901). 

Notice of decision forwarded applicant July 22, 1902. 

Notice of decision mailed attorneys for Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations July 22, 1902. 

The application of the several persons herein for identification as Mississippi Choctaws refused in the 
decision in the case of W. J. Sloan Harrison et al., M. C. R. 2257. Forwarded the Secretary of the Interior 
July 22, 1902. 

Action approved by Secretary of Interior October 23, 1902. 

Notice of departmental action mailed applicant November 8, 1902. 

Notice of departmental action forwarded attorneys for Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations November 8, 1902. 

Stamped: Refused. Rejected. 

Choctmo Nation; Stei'ritt, Ind. T.; Mississippi Choctatv Indians; field No. R. SSS'i. 



Name. 



Relation- 
ship to 
person 
first 
named. 



Age. 


Sex. 


Blood. 


34 


F. 


J 


17 


F. 


1 


16 


F. 


i 


14 


M. 


i 


12 


F. 


i 


11 


F. 


i 


8 


M. 


i 


6 


F. 


i 


4 


F. 


I 


1 


M. 


h 



Tribal enrollment of parents. 



Name of father. 



Name of mother. 



1. Ruth, Annie 

2. Ruth, Louisa 

3. Ruth, Ella 

4. Ruth, James 

5. Ruth, Angie 

6. Ruth, Viola 

7. Ruth, George 

8. Ruth, Louisiana 

9. Ruth, Haley 

10. Ruth, John 



D a ugh- 
ter. 

...do 

Son 

D a ligh- 
ter. 

...do 

Son 

Daugh- 
ter. 

...do 

Son 



Sloan Harrison, claim 

Choctaw. 
Jim Ruth, noncitizen. 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 

do 



Mahala Harrison, non- 
citizen. 
No. 1. 

Do. 
Do. 
Do. 

Do. 
Do. 
Do. 

Do. 
Do. 



Record forwarded department, July 22, 1902. 

Decision rendered July 22, 1902. 

Refer to M. C. R. 2257. 

Decision prepared June 13, 1902. (See testimony of Oct. 25, 1901.) 

Notice of decisiim forwarded applicant July 22, 1902. 

Notice of decision mailed attorneys for Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations July 22, 1902. 

The application of the several persons herein for identification as Mississippi Choctaws refused in the 
decision in the case of W. J. Sloan, Harrison et al., M. C. R. 2257. Forwarded the Secretary of the Interior 
July 22, 1902. 

Action approved liy Secretary of Interior, Oct. 23, 1902. 

Notice of departmental action mailed applicMit, Nov. 8, 1902. 

Notice of departmental action forwarded attorneys for Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, Nov. 8, 1902. 



INDIAN APPKOPEIATION BILL. 389 

Exhibit C2. 

Depaktment of the Interior, 
Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes. 
In the matter of the application of W. J. Sloan Harrison, et al., for identifica- 
tion as Mississippi Choctaws, consolidating the applications of W. J. Sloan 
Harrison, et al., M. C. R. 2257; Joe Harrison, et al., M. C. R. 3832; Lvdie 
Williams, et al., M. C. R. 3833; Annie Ruth, et al., M. C. R. 3834; Louisa 
Hatcher, et al., M. C. R. 3835; Slone Harrison, et al., M. C. R. 4112; Ella 
Hatcher, et al., M. C. R. 4137 ; John Harrison, et al., M. C. R. 4138. 

decision. 

It appears from the record herein that applications for identification as 
Mississippi Choctaws were made to this commission by W. J. Sloan Harrison 
for himself; by Joe Harrison for himself and his minor child, Maggie Dell 
Harrison; by Lydia Williams for herself and her eight minor children, John- 
son, Jesse, Hattie, Finey, Roxana, Rosie, Sloan Harrison, and Mamie Williams ; 
by Annie Ruth for herself and her nine minor children, Louisa, Ella, James, 
Angle, Viola, George, Louisiana, Haley, and John Ruth ; by Louisa 
Hatcher for herself and her three minor children, Finey, Ada, and Mandy 
Hatcher ; by Sloan Harrison for himself and his two minor children, Charlie, 
and Randy Harrison ; by Ella Hatcher for herself and her four minor children, 
Lula, Mollie, Dollie, and Myrtle Hatcher ; by John Harrison for himself and 
his minor child, Henry Harrison ; and by W. J. Sloan Harrison for the identifi- 
cation of his wife, Mahala Harrison, as an intermarried Mississippi Choctaw, 
under the following provision of the act of Congress approved June 28, 1898 
(30 Stats., 495) : 

" Said commission shall have authority to determine the identity of Choctaw 
Indians claiming rights in the Choctaw lands under article fourteen 
of the treaty between the United States and the Choctaw Nation, concluded 
September twenty-seventh, eighteen hundred and thirty, and to that end may 
administer oaths, examine witnesses, and perform all other acts necessary 
thereto, and make report to the Secretary of the Interior." 

It also appears that all of said applicants claim rights in the Choctaw lands 
under article 14 of the treaty between the United States and the Choctaw 
Nation, concluded September 27, 1830, by reason of being descendants of one 
W. J. Sloan Harrison, who is alleged to have been a full-blood Choctaw Indian 
and to have resided in Mississippi in 1830. 

It further appears from the evidence submitted in support of said applica- 
tions, and from the records in the possession of the commission, that no one 
of said applicants has ever been enrolled by the Choctaw tribal authorities as 
a member of the Choctaw Tribe, or admitted to Choctaw citizenship by a duly 
constituted court or committee of the Choctaw Nation, or by the Commission 
to the Five Civilized Tribes, or by a decree of the United States Court in 
Indian Territory, under the provisions of the act of Congress approved June 10, 
1896 (29 Stats., 321). 

It does not appear from the testimony and evidence offered in support of 
said applications, or from the records in the possession of the commission re- 
lating to persons who complied or attempted to comply with the provisions of 
said article 14 of the treaty of 1830, and to persons who heretofore wei'e 
claimants tliereunder, that the said W. .1. Sloan Harrison, or any of the 
applicants herein, signified (in perscm or by proxy) 1o Col. William Ward, 
Indian agent, Choctaw Agency, an intention to comply with the provisions 
of said article 14, or presented a claim to rights thereunder to either of the 
commissions authorized to adjudicate such claims by the acts of Congress 
approved March 3, 1837 (5 Stats., 180), and August 23, 1842 (5 Stats., 513). 

It is, therefore, the opinion of this conuuission that the evidence herein is 
insufficient to determine the identity of W. J. Sloan Harrison, .Toe Harrison, 
Maggie Dell Harrison, Lydia Williams, .Tohnson Williams, .Te.sse Williams, Hat- 
tie Williams, Finey Williams, Roxana Williams, Rosie Williams, Sloan Harrison 
Williams, Mamie Williams, Annie Rulh, Louisa Ruth, Ella Ruth, James Ruth, 
Angle Ruth, Viola Ruth, George Ruth, Louisiana Ruth, Haley Ruth, John Ruth, 
Louisa Hatcher, Finey Hatcher, Ada Hatcher, Mandy Hatcher, Sloan Harri.son, 
Charlie Harrison, Randy Harrison, Ella Hatcher, Lula Hatcher, Mollie Hatcher, 
Dollie Hatcher, Myrtle Hatcher, John Harrison, and Henry Harrison, as Choc- 



390 INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL. 

taw Indians entitled to rij^lUs in the Choctaw lands under the provisions of said 
article 14 of the treaty of 1S30, and that the applications for their identification 
as such should he refused, and it is so ordered. 

It is the further opinion of the commission that under the provision of law 
above quoted no person is entitled to identification as a Mississippi Choctaw by 
marriage, and that the application made by W. J. Sloan Harrison for the identi- 
fication of his wife, Mahala Harrison, as an intermarried Mississippi Choctaw^ 
should therefore be refused, and it is so ordered. 

The Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes. 
(Signed) Tams Bixby, 

Acting Chairman. 
(Signed) T. B. Needles, 

(Signed) C. R. Breckinkidge, 

Commissioners. 
Muskogee, Indian Territory, July 22, 1902. 



Department of the Interior, 
Office of Superintendent foe the Five Civilized Tribes, 

Muskogee, Okla. 
' This is to certify that I am the officer having custody of the records pertain- 
ing to the enrollment of the members of the Choctaw, Chickasaw, Cherokee, 
Creek, and Seminole Tribes of Indians, and the disposition of the land of said 
tribes, and that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of testimony 
taken on May 23, 1901, and decision dated on July 22, 1902, in the matter of the 
application of Sloan Harrison for identification as a Mississippi Choctaw and 
for his wife as an intermarried Mississippi Choctaw. 

Gabe E. Parker, Super ntcndent. 
By W. H. Angell, 

Clerk in Charge Choctaw Records. 
.July 28, 1915. 



Exhibit D. 
Refer to M. C R. 22.">T. Sloan Harrison et al. Consolidated case. 



W. J. Sloan Harrison, full blood; wife, Lydia Harrison, negress. Second mar- 
riage to one Sanders. 
M. C. R. 2257. W. J. Sloan Harrison, 65, I & Negro ; wife, Mahala Harri- 
son, part Indian, Negro, & white. Claims for wife. 

M. C. R. 3832. Joe Harrison, 37, I Negro; wife, Beulah Harrison, 
negress. 

M. C. R. 8832. Maggie Dell Harrison, 1. 
M. C. R. 3833. Lydia Harrison, 35, h uegress, mar. Sam. Williams, 
Negro. 

M. C. R. 3833. Johnson Williams, 20. 
M. C. R. 3833. Jesse Williams, 13. 
M. C. R. 3833. Hattie AVilliams, 11. 
M. C. R. 3833. Finey Williams, 10.' 
M. C. R. 3S33. Roxana Williams. 8. 
M. C. R. 3833. Rosie Williams, 7. 
M. C. R. 3833. Sloan H. Williams, 4. 
M. C. R. 3833. Mamie Williams, 2. 
M. C. R. 3834. Annie Harrison, 34. i, negress, mar. Jim Ruth, Negro. 
M. C. R. 8834. Louisa Ruth, 17. 
M. C. R. 3884. Ella Ruth, 16. 
M. C. R. 3834. James Ruth, 14. 
M. C. R. 38.34. Angie Ruth. 12. 
M. C. R. 3834. Viola Ruth, 11. 
M. C. R. 3834. George Ruth, 8. 
M. C. R. 3884. Louisiana Ruth, 6. 
M. C. R. 3834. Haley Ruth, 3. 
M. C. R. 3834. John Ruth, 1. 



INDIAN APPKOPRTATION BILL. 39-1 

M. C. K. 3835. Louisa Harrison. 28, i, uiar. Henry Hatcher, dead, 
Negro. 

M. C. R. 3835. Finey Hatcher, 6. 

M, C. R. 3835. Ada Hatcher, 4. 

M. C. R. 3835. Mandy Hatcher, 2. 
M. C. R. 4112. Sloan Harrison, 24, i; wife, Mollie Harrison, negress. 

M. C. R. 4112. Charlie Harrison, 4. 

M. C. R. 4112. Randy Harrison, 2. 
M. C. R. 4137. Ella Harrison. 24. i, mar. Will Hatcher, -Negro. 

M. C. R. 4137. Lula Hatcher, 5. 

M. C. R. 4137. Mollie Hatcher, 4. 

M. C. R. 4137. Dollie Hatcher, 2. 

M. C. R. 4137. Myrtle Hatcher, 9 mo. 
M. C. R. 413S. John Harrison, 23, i, Negro; wife, Lanra Harrison, 

M. C. R. 4138. Henry Harrison, 6 mo. 



Exhibit E. 

Department of the Interior, 
Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, 

Atoka, Ind. T., May 23, 1901. 
In the matter of the application of Sloan Harrison for identification as a 
Mississippi Choctaw and for his wife as an intermarried Mississippi Choctaw. 

SLOAN HARRISON, having heen first duly sworn, testifies as follows: 
Examination by the Commission : 

Q. What is your name? — A. Sloan Harrison. 

Q. What is your age? — A. Sixty-five. 

Q. What is your post-ofiice address?— A. Cale, Ind. T. (Now Sterrett.) 

Q. How long have you lived there? — A. Twenty-one years and more. 

Q. Where did you live before that?— A. I came to the Territory from Texas. 

Q. What part of Texas? — A. Grimes County, Tex. 

Q. How long did you live in Texas? — A. I don't l^now; long time — ever since 
I came south from Alabama — can't tell how many years. 

Q. Where did you live before you came to Texas? — A. Mississippi and Ala- 
bama ; they both ad.ioin, you know. 

Q. Which one? — A. Alabama. 

Q. Were you born in Alabama? — A. Yes; bred and born there. 

Q. Lived there until you came to Texas? — A. Yes. 

Q. And from Texas you came to the Indian Territory? — A. Yes. 

Q. What is your father's name? — A. Sloan Harrison. 

Q. Is he living? — A. He is dead. 

Q. What is your mother's name? — A. Lydie Sanders. 

Q. Is she living?— A. Yes. 

Q. Through which one of your [tai-enls do you derive your Choctaw blood? — 
A. I .iust claim I am a Choctaw. 

Q. Was your father or your luother a Choctaw? — A. INIy father; my mother 
was not a Choctaw Indian. 

Q. How much Choctaw l)l««nd do you claim?— A. I claim the full riglit from 
liim. 

Q. Was he a full-bh.od?— A. Yes. 

Q. How much would that make you?— A. That would be one-half, wouldn't it? 

Q. What was your mother? — A. She was colored. 

Q. AVas she ever a slave? — .V. Yes. 

Q. Has your father, through whom you claim your i-ight to identification as 
a Mississippi Clioctaw, ever been recognized in any manner or enrolled as a 
member of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians by either the Choctaw tribal authori- 
ties or the authorities of the United States?— A. I don't know, you know. 

Q. He never was enrolled in Ihe Indian Territory?— A. No; he died back 
thei'e in their country. 

Q. Are you married? — .V. Me — yes. 

Q. What is vour wife's name?— A. :Mah!ila Harrison. 



392 INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 

Q. Do you mtike any claim for her? — A. Yes. 

Q. How do you claim for her — is she Indian? — A. Her mother was Indian 
herself and grandmother. 

Q. Were they Choctaws? — ^A. I don't know whether they were Choctaws or 
Chickasaws, their part ; I know my part is Choctaw. 

Q. You claim for her, then, because she married you? — A. Yes. 

Q. AVhen were you married to Mahala Harrison? — A. I forget how many 
years I have been married now. 

Q. Can't you tell about how many years? — A. Yes; about 40 years old. Yes, 
mayl)e more, I recollect it's so far back, 

Q. Were you married before the war? — A. Yes, then, before the war. 

Q. What was your wife's age? — A. About 45; I am uneducated; don't know 
exactly. 

Q. What was her father's name? — A. George Walker. 

Q. Is he living?— A. Dead. 

Q. What was her mother's name? — A. Jane Walker. 

Q. Is she living? — A. She is dead. 

Q. Is your wife a white woman? — A. No; she is colored. 

Q. She makes no claim to Indian blood? — A. Only by her mother. 

Q. What was her mother? — A. Indian; her mother and grandmother, both. 

Q. What kind of Indian did they claim to be? — A. They know more than I 
do, both ; she aint putting in any claim. 

Q. What Indian blood does your wife claim to have? — A. I don't know 
whether it is Choctaw or Chickasaw. 

Q. Her mother, then, was one or the other, and you don't know which? — 
A. No. 

Q. Have you any children in your family under 21 years of age and un- 
married for whom you desire to make application now? — A. No, all mine are 
married. 

Q. You are making this application for yourself alone? — A. Yes; for me and 
my wife and my children. 

Q. You are making this just for yourself and wife? — A. Yes. 

Q. Did you obtain a license to marry? — A. Yes. 

Q. Were you married by an ordained minister or by an official authorized to 
perform the marriage ceremony? — A. By a minister. 

Q. Have you your marriage license and certificate, and do you desire to offer 
same in evidence? — A. They are recorded in the courthouse. 

It will be necessary for the commission to be supplied with evidence of your 
marriage with Mahala Harrison in support of your claim for her. 

Q. Is your name on any of the tribal rolls of the Choctaw Nation in the 
Indian Territory? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Have you ever made application to the Choctaw tribal authorities in the 
Indian Territory to be enrolled as a member of that tribe? — A. I have been 
down there with them — never got to them — stayed in Durant four days. 

Q. You are talking about the commission now? — A. Yes. 

Q. Have you ever made application to the Choctaw tribal authorities? — 
A. No. 

Q. Did you, or any one for you, in 1896, make application to the Commission 
to the Five Civilized Tribes for citizenship in the Choctaw Nation, under the 
act of Congress of June 10, 1896? — A. I don't know anything about that. 

Q. That was about five years ago; did you make application then? — A. Well, 
that's the time — no it's not at Durant — that is all i know; this one at Durant. 

Q. But you did not make application in 1896? — A. No; you see I am unedu- 
cated. 

Q. Have you ever been admitted to citizenship in the Choctah Nation by 
the Chocktaw tribal authorities, the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes, or 
by judgment of the United States Court in Indian Territory? — A. No, I aint 
been before them to have anything carried on like that. 

Q. Have you ever made application prior to this time to either the Choctaw 
tribal authorities or the authorities of the United States to be admitted or en- 
rolled as a citizen of the Choctaw Nation? — A. No, I never. 

Q. Is this the first application you have made of any description? — A. Yes; 
I have tried before, you know, but it aint done any good. 

Q. When you say that you were before the connuissioner with the commission 
at Durant, do you mean that you were just up there and listening, or do you 
mean that yo\i were sworn and examined and a record made of it? — A. I aint 
been sworn, but I just asked questions and wanted to find out. 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 393 

Q. You never were sworn and put on the stand and asked questions like 
now? — A. No. 

Q. Is it now your purpose to make application for identification as a Missis- 
sippi Choctaw? — A. Yes. 

Q. Do you claim your rights as beneficiaries under the fourteenth article of 
the treaty of 1830?— A. I dou"t know that 1430. 

Q. Article 14 of the treaty of 1830 is as follows : " Each Choctaw head of a 
family being desirous to remain and become a citizen of the United States shall 
be permitted to do so by signifying his intention to the agent within six months 
from the ratification of this treaty, and he or she shall thereupon be entitled to 
a reservation of one section of six hundred and forty acres of land, to be 
bounded by sectional lines of survey ; in like manner shall be entitled to one- 
half that quantity for each unmarried child which is living with him over ten 
years of age, and a quarter section of land to such child as may be under 
ten years, to adjoin the location of the parent. If they reside upon said 
lands intending to become citizens of the States for five years after the ratifica- 
tion of this treaty, in that case a grant in fee simple shall issue. Said reser- 
vation shall include the present improvement of the head of the family or a 
portion of it. Persons claiming under this article shall not lose the privilege 
of a Choctaw citizen, but, if they ever remove are not to be entitled to any 
portion of the Choctaw annuity." Do you claim under that article of that 
treaty? — A. Yes, I claim it. 

Q. Have you ever received any benefits as a Choctaw Indian? — A. No; just 
been working like the rest of them. 

Q. Do you know what benefits means? — A. I suppose you mean owning this 
land and using it. 

Q. Or moneys? — A. No. I haven't got any money. 

Q. Nor land?— A. No. 

Q. Are you living on land in the Territory now? — A. Yes. 

Q. How much land do you claim? — A. Where I am I am claiming 160 acres. 

Q. Have any of your ancestors ever received any benefits as Choctaw In- 
dians?— A. No. 

Q. What was the name of your ancestor or ancestors who, your fore-parents, 
your father or mother, grandfather or grandmother, who were residents of 
the old Choctaw Nation in IMississippi or Alabama and i*ecognized members 
of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians in 1830 when the treaty of Dancing Rabbit 
Creek was entered into between the United States and the Choctaw Tribe of 
Indians? — A. I reckon at that time I was too young to know anything about it. 

Q. Well, was your father living in Mississippi or Alabama at that time? — A. 
Yes, I reckon that is where he died. 

Q. Well, was he living there in 1830? — A. I don't know what number that 
was neither. 

Q. Well, that is a little over 70 years ago? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Did you ever hear that your father was living in Mississippi five years 
before you were born? — A. He was living there then; my mother told me so; 
she knows about that. 

Q. Have you any evidence showing that such ancestor was a recognized 
member of the Choctaw tribe of Indians at that time — that is, have you any 
evidence to prove that your fatlier was a Choctaw Indian and known as such 
by the Choctaw Indians themselves in Mississippi? — A. I know plenty of them 
but I can't find them. 

Q. Did your father, if a Cboctaw Indian, remove from the territory occupied 
by the old Choctaw Nation in Mississippi or Alabama to the present Choctaw 
Nation in Indian Territory, at the time of the removal of the otlier members 
of the Choctaw tril)e. from 1833 to 1938? — A. I guess he was dead then. 

Q. He did not come West? — A. No; he died there. 

Q. If he did not reiuove wltli the other members of the tribe, did he, within 
six months after the ratification of the treaty of 1830, signify to the United 
States agent to the Clioctaw Tribe of Indians in Mississippi, his intention to 
remain in Mississippi and become a citizen of the United States? — A. I didn't 
know tliat there was anytliing of this kind in them days, you know. 

Q. Did he go to tiu? Indian agent in Mississippi, Col. Ward, and Icll him 
tliat he intended to stay there, and take land and become a citizen of the United 
States? — A. I don't know anytliing aitont that. 

Q. Did any of your ancestors ever claim or receive any land in Mississippi 
as beneficiaries under the fourteenth article of tlie treaty of 1830? — A. If I 



394 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

li!iv»' land by my Dafldy's side? I know lio got land there; my father was; 
he is dead, but he got land there. 

Q. Did he get it from the Government? — A. He got it like tlie balance; don't 
know whether he got it that way. 

Q. Who owns the land now that he used to have in Mississippi? — A. I reckon 
it is tliere now. 

Q. Are there any additional statements that yon desire to make now in sup- 
port of this application; that is, is there anything more that you want to say? — 
A. I claim that I have a riglit to get land if it is respected. 

Q. Have you any documentary evidence, aftidavits, written evidence of any 
description, copies of records, deeds of i)atents, or any proper papers showing 
that any of your ancestors were recognized members of tlie Choctaw Tribe of 
Indians in Mississippi in 1830, or tliat they ever complied or attempted to 
comply with the provisions of the fourteentli article of the treaty of 1830, or 
that they ever received any benefits under that article of that treaty? — A. 
That is sometliing I don't get on to. 

Q. Are there any papers that you want to offer now to the conunission to 
file in support your application? — A. Yes. 

Petition of W. J. Sloan Harrison offered in evidence by applicant, marked 
" Exhibit A." filed and made a part of the record in this case ; affidavit of 
Joseph Davis, offered in evidence, marked " Exhibit B," filed and made a part 
of the records in this case ; affidavit of Lydia Sanders offered in evidence by 
applicant, marked " Exhibit G," filed and made a part of tlie records in this 
case. 

Q. Do you want more time to file additional evidence? — A. Yes. 

(Thirty days' time is allowed applicant in which to file any more additional 
evidence in support of his application.) 

The decision of the commission as to your application for identification as 
a Mississippi Choctaw, and for your wife as an intermarried Mississippi 
Choctaw, will be determined at the earliest possible date, and report of same 
made to the Secretary of the Interior, conformable to the provisions of the 
twenty-first section of the act of Congress of June 28. 1898, and a copy of the 
same will be mailed to you at your post-office address as given by you in your 
testimony. 

This applicant has slight apfiearance of being Indian; is dark skinned; has 
high cheek bones, straight nose, but his hair is slightly curly at the ends. 

Henry G. Hains, being duly sworn, on his oath states that as stenographer 
to the Conuuission to tlie Five Civilized Tribes he reported in full all proceed- 
ings had in the above-entitled cause on May 22, 1901, and tliat the above and 
foregoing is a full, true, and correct transcript of his stenographic notes in said 
cause on said date. 

[SEAL.] Henry G. Hains. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this lutli day of July, 1901. 

(Signed) D. H. Linebaugh, 

Notari/ Public. 



Exhibit P. 

Department of the Interior, 
Office of Superintendent, Five Civilized Trihes, 

iluskofjcc, Okla., Auf/ust 10, 1915. 
Ill the matter of tlie application for the enrollment of John Harrison as a 
citizen l)y blood of the (Choctaw Nation. 

J(tlIX ilAUHISON, iH'ing first duly sworn by William L. Bowie, Deputy 
Clerk of the United States Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma, on oath 
testified as follows : 

Examination Iiy William I-. Howie on helialf of tiie SnjH'rintendent 
for the Five Civilized Tribes : 
Q. State your name. — A. John HarrisoiL 
Q. State "your age.— A. 37. 

Q. Where do you live? — A. Live in the Cherokee Nation, Keefeton. 
Q. How far from Keefeton? — A. One and one-lialf miles. 
Q. AVhat is your occupation? — A. Farming. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 395 

Q. You have made application for enrollment as an Indian citizen? — A. Yes, 
sir. 

Q. Before whom did you make this application? — A. I have forgotten the 
man's name; I can't call his name. His office is down on the second floor, 
though. 

Q. Do you remember the number of the office? — A. No, sir; I don't. 

Q. Is there more than one person engaged in that business? — A. No, sir; 
there was just one. 

Q. A wliite man? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What is the occupation of that man? — A. I don't know, sir; the only 
thing I seen him doing was taking applications. 

Q. Applications for enrollment? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether his name was Lindly? — A. I think that is his name. 

Q. How did you happen to go to Mr. Lindly's office to make application for 
enrollment? — A. I just heard of him being here for that purpose from other 
people, so I just went. 

Q. What was told you exactly about his business? — A. AVell, I don't know, 
sir ; I can't tell you. 

Q. ^■\'ere you told that he was in the Government service? — A. I don't know 
whether he was in the Government service or not. 

Q. What was your belief about it when you went to him ; did you go to him 
Tinder the impression that he was a Government man? — A. Yes, sir; I think 
that is what I understood. 

Q. You understood that before you went to him? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did he give you to understand that he was in the Government service? — 
A. I never asked him. 

Q. Did he say anything to yoii that led you to believe that he was in the 
Government service*/ — A. He asked me after I made my statement to him if 
I had witnesses. 

Q. What did you tell him?— A. I told him I had. 

Q. What witnesses did you tell him you had? — A. Alec Nail. 

Q. Anyone else? — A. Him and his brother. 

Q. What is his brother's name? — A. Peter Nail. 

Q. AVhere does Peter live? — A. At Wagoner. 

Q. Did you talk with Alec Nail before you .saw Mr. T.,indly? — A. Why, no, 
sir; I didn't have no talk with him until I came up here. 

Q. You saw Mr. I.indly first before you talked with Alec Nail? — A. I saw 
Alec Nail in the office up here. 

Q. Did you talk with Mr. Lindly before you talked with Alec Nail; answer 
yes or no? — A. Let me see; I want to tell the truth about it. Yes, sir. 

Q. You talked with Alec first?— A. I talked with Lindly first. 

Q. Well, how did you come to tell him that you had Alec for a witness? — A. I 
knew that he knew my father. 

Q. Had you seen Alec Nail ; how did you know he was here? — A. You mean 
here in town? 

Q. Yes. — A. I didn't know he was in town at the time until I sent after 
Peter. 

Q. Did you talk with I'eter before you talked to :Mr. Lindly? — A. No, sir; I 
sent up for him. 

Q. AVho told .you Peter was in Wagoner? — -A. I knew lie was there: I had 
been in Wagoner. 

Q. Did you talk with him any before you talked with Mr. Lindly? — A. No, sir. 

Q. What did Mr. Lindly tell you he would charge you for i)Utting in this 
application for you? — A. He didn't say he would charge anything. 

Q. Did he say there would be no cost connected with it? — A. He said I would 
liave to pay all the notary fees and the witness fees. 

Q. What did he say tlie notary and witness fees would amount to? — A. He 
didn't say, but I knew what I would pay. 

Q. Did he send you to some one else after you talked with him? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Did he take yoiu* testimony himself? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. You did not talk with a colored man named Nelson Durant? — A. No, sir; 
he was not in when I put in my application. I don't know him. 

Q. All the conversation you had, then, in this office about this matter was 
with Mr. Lindly?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How nmch did you pay your witnesses? — A. I paid them $1 a day. 

Q. How many days did it take? — A. He was up here two days before they 
came to my case. 



396 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Q. What one was that? — A. Alec and Peter both. 

Q. You gave them $1 a day each? — A. Each; yes, sii'. 

Q. So that was $4 for two days?^A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How much did the notary public charge you? — A. Fifty cents. 

Q. Fifty cents a piece for your papers? — A. I paid him 50 cents. 

Q. For all the work that he did? — A. No, sir; for mine. 

Q. For your application? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What did you pay him for executing this affidavit? — A. Fifty cents a piece, 
I believe. 

Q. How much did you pay him altogether? — A. $1.50, I think. 

Q. Two affidavits?— A. Three. 

Q. Did some of your sisters come up here and make affidavit? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you present when they were here? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know how much they paid? — A. No, sir; I don't know. They 
didn't tell me. 

Q. Did you promise to pay anything more if your application went through 
all right? — A. l''es, sir; I promised to pay them for the expense. 

Q. How much? — A. I thing I promised to pay them $100. 

Q. Who did you promise to pay this to? — A. Alec and Peter Nail. 

Q. Did Mr. Lindly exact any promise from you of that nature? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Well why did you think you had to pay Alec and Peter Nail such an 
amount of money for their work? — A. I jest agreed to give them that for their 
trouble. 

Q. Did you not pay them for their trouble? — A. I paid them $1 a day. 

Q. Did they do anything except act as your witnesses? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Why did you think you had to pay them more? — A. I thought they de- 
served it. 

Q. Why did you think they deserved $50.00 apiece? — A. Because they were 
old men. 

Q. You do not mean to say that you intend to give $50.00 to all the old 
men ? — A. No, sir ; Mr. Nail is old and feeble and he deserved something. 

Q. What was the name of your father? — A. Sloan Harrison. 

Q. The name of your mother? — A. Mahala Harrison. 

Q. What Indian blood do you claim to be? — A. One-fourth. 

Q. What tribe?— A. Choctaw. 

Q. From which side do you get your Indian blood? — A. From my father. 

Q. Is all your Indian blood from your father's side? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What degree of blood was your father? — A. He was said to be one-half 
blood. 

Q. From whom did he obtain this blood, from his father or mother? — A. His 
father. 

Q. Of what degree of blood was his father? — A. He was said to be a full 
blood. 

Q. That is your grandfather on your father's side? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What was his name?— A. Well, I don't know. They say my father was 
named after him, Sloan Harrison. 

Q. You think it is the same name? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Of what blood was your mother? — A. She was colored. 

Q. Altogether colored? — A. I guess so, I don't know. 

Q. Do you know of what blood your father's mother was, your grandmother 
on your father's side? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know whether she was of negro blood? — A. No, sir; I don't 
know. I don't know whether she had negro at all or not. 

Q. Did your father have any brothers?— A. He was supposed to have from 
what I have always been taught. 

Q. Give the names of your father's brothers?— A. Half brothers is all. 

Q. Do you know their names? — A. I think one was Robert. 

Q. Robert Harrison?— A. Yes, sir; and William. 

Q. Is that all? — A. I don't know whether that is all or not. 

Q. Were they your father's full brothers?— A. No, sir; half brothers. 

Q. Different mother? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Of what blood was the mother of those two boys, do you know? — A. No, 
sir^ I don't; I don't know any thing about them. 

Q. Did vour father have any sisters? — A. I don't know, sir. 

Q. Was'your father enrolled as a citizen of the Choctaw Nation?— A. I don't 
know whether he was or not, he used to own land down there before allotment. 

Q. When did he die?— A. 1912. 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 397 

Q. After allotment? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Never received an allotment of land? — A, No, sir. 

Q. Your mother was not a freed woman? — A. No, sir; I don't think she was. 

Q. She never received an allotment? — A. No, sir; not that I know of. 

Q. Was your father's father enrolled as a member of any of the tribes? — A. 
I don't know, sir ; I couldn't tell you that. 

Q. Do you know whether your father's half brothers that you have named 
were enrolled or not? — A. No, sir; I don't think so. 

Q. Now name your sisters? — A. Fannie Williams, Anna Ruth, Mollie Jones, 
Ella Hatcher, and Minnie Bowie. 

Q. Is that all?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are all those sisters living? — A. Yes, sir; I guess so. 

Q. Name your living brothers. — A. Joe Harrison, Solan Harrison, and John 
Harrison. 

Q. Have you any sisters dead? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Any brothers dead? — A. Well, I have one brother that is dead, but he died 
when he was little. 

Q. What is his name? — A. I think they called him Marster. 

Q. Are all these sisters full sisters? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are your brothers full brothers? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was your father married more than one time? — A. No, sir. 

Q. When did your mother die? — A. She died in 1908. 

Q. Did you father and mother live together up until their death? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you Ivuow when they were married? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether ,they were married by ceremony ? — A. No, sir ; I 
couldn't tell you. 

Q. Do you know whether your father applied for an allotment ? — A. Yes, sir ; 
I tliink he did. 

Q. Before the Dawes Commission? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What do you know about that exactly ?^A. I don't know; I couldn't tell 
you anything about it. 

Q. Did you ever look it up or have it looked up? — A. We got his application 
up in the office. 

Q. You have it? — A. No, sir; I haven't got it. 

Q. Well, the question I asked was. Did you ever look it up? Did you ever 
see these papers or have them examined to find out what action was taken 
concerning his application? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Was not this application of his rejected by the Dawes Commission? — 
A. I think it was ; I am not sure. 

Q. Do you know upon what grounds that application was rejected? — A. 
No, sir. 

Q. Was your father ever a recognized citizen of the Choctaw Nation? — A. 
Yes, sir ; he used to be down there. 

Q. He was? — ^A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who was he recognized by? Was he ever on any of the rolls of the Choc- 
taw Nation? — A. Not that I know of; I couldn't tell you. 

Q. What makes you think he was a recognized citizen? — A. Thei*e are lots of 
the old ones down there that say he was a Choctaw. 

Q. Did he vote as a citizen of the Choctaw Nation? — A. I don't know, sir; 
I suppose he did. 

Q. You don't know? — ^A. No, sir. 

Q. You do not know whether he enjoyed any other rights in the Choctaw 
Nation ? — A. No, sir ; I don't know. 

Q. Where were you born? — A. I was born in the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. Where exactly? — A. Close to Carriage Point. 

Q. Where is that close to? — A. Four miles southwest of Dewey. 

Q. Were you raised there? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. How old were you when you left that vicinity? — A. When I left that part 
of the country down there? 

Q. Yes.— A. I left there in 1908. 

Q. Had you ever moved away from there prior to 1908 ? — A. Yes, sir ; I have 
traveled around. 

Q. How long did you remain away on these travels? — A. Sometimes 2 or 3 
months. 

Q. Sometimes 2 or 3 years? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever stay away as long as a year? — A. No, sir. 



398 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Q. Where did you go? — A. Up in Kansas, St. Louis, and Kansas City. 

Q. What did you do in Kansas City and St. Louis? — A. Worked. 

Q. At what occupation? — A. I worljed for the Wabash. 

Q. When was this? — A. That's been since I have been up here. 

Q. I mean when you were in the Choctaw Nation? — A. I was not up there 
Avhen I was down there. 

Q. Do you know where your father was born? — A. He was born in 
Mississippi. 

Q. Do you know when lie came to tliis country? — A No sir, I don't. 

Q. When he left Mississippi where did he go? — A. Came to the Indian Terri- 
tory, I suppose. 

Q. What Nation?— A. Choctaw. 

Q. Have you any understanding upon the subject as to when he left Missis- 
sippi? — A. I don't think I can say. 

Q. When he applied for enrollment did he apply as a Mississippi Choctaw? — 
A. I can't tell you. 

Q. You do not know whether he applied for enrollment as a Mississippi 
Choctaw or not? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Are you married? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When were you married and to whom? — A. I married in 1901. 

Q. What is the name of your wife? — A. Laura, used to be Laura Robbins. 

Q. Where were you married? — A. On Blue. 

Q. In 1901?— A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where is Blue located? — A. North of Durant. 

Q. In the Choctaw Nation? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were you married by ceremony? — A. Yes, sir, license. 

Q. Of what blood is your wife? — A. She is colored. 

Q. What is her color? — A. She is brown skin, near my color. 

Q. Have you ever been to school? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Can you write your name?^A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where did you learn to write your name? — A. Just doing it by practice. 

Q. You have always passed as a colored man, lived around colored people? — 
A. Well, I used to be classed as a half blood. 

Q. That is what you call your.self you mean? — A. Yes, sir. 

(}. But you have always lived with colored people? — A. Yes, sir; after the 
country got settled up. 

Q. How many brothers did you say your father had? — A. Two is all that I 
know. 

Q. Name those brothers again. — A. Robert and William. I don't know for 
certain only what I have been taught. 

Q. Do you know whether your father had any other name than Sloan? — 
A. Why yes, sir ; lots of times they called him Henry but that was just a 
given name. 

Q. What name was he commonly Ivuown by, Henry? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Generally called Henry? — A. Sometimes he was called Henry. 

Q. You say he had a half brother named William? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Same mother and same father? — A. I don't know; I suppose same fatlier. 

Q. Did you ever know William? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Ever see him? — A. If I did I don't know it. 

Q. How about Robert? — A. I don't know him. 

Q. You do not know then whether William or Robert is living? — A. No, sir; 
I don't. 

Q. You say you do not know whether they were enrolled? — A. No, sir; I 
don't know. 

Q. In this application that you made before INIr. Lindly, sworn to before 
Julius Golden, I will ask you to identify your signature as it appears there 
attached to the affidivit? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. In this application you state that your father had a l)rother named Wil- 
liam H. Harrison, whose name appears on the approved roll opposite No. 7663; 
how about this statement ; do you know as a matter of fact whether the person 
who is enrolled opposite this number, 7663. under the name of William H. Har- 
rison, is a brother of your father? — A. Only what I have been told. 

Q. Who told you that this person on the roll at No. 7663 is a brother of your 
father? — A. I don't know any thing about the number, I didn't testify to that. 

Q. You did not understand, then, that you were testifying that the person 
borne on the rolls under this number was your father's brother; you do not 
know that to be a fact? — A. No, sir; I don't know. 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 399 

Q. You do not know that a person borne on the rolls of citizens by blood of 
the Choctaw Nation opposite No. 32175, under the name of Robert Harrison, 
Is a brother of your father? — A. No sir, I don't laiow. 

Q. Who identitied these persons on the rolls? Who found these names on 
the rolls, did Lindly look tliem ui>? — A. I don't know whether he did or not. 

Q. Who wrote this affidavit? — A. ]Mr. Lindly wrote it off. 

Q. Did he look these roll numbers up? — A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Who did? — A. I don't know, sir. 

Q. You do not know? — A. No. sir, I don't. 

Q. How long have you known Pgter Nail? — A. I have been knowing Peter 
Nail 

Q. When did you first meet him personally? — A. Been about 4 years ago 
when I met him i^ersonally. 

Q. Where did you first meet liim? — A. At Wagoner. 

Q. That is since you have lived up here in this country? — A. Yes sir, I got 
acquainted with Alec at Durant. 

Q. When was it that you first met Alec? — A. I can't tell you what year that 
was, it was several years ago. 

Q. You are po.sitive you met him at Durant? — ^A. Yes sir. 

Q. Just met him one time?— A. No sir, I have met him more than one time at 
Durant. 

Q. Where did Alec Nail live when you met him in Durant? — A. Around 
Durant. 

Q. As a matter of fact I think he testified that he had been living around 
Boggy Depot. — ^A. Yes sir, that is where he used to live when he came down 
to my father's farm. 

Q. Where was your father's farm? — A, Right on the line of the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nation. 

Q. Exactly how far from the nearest railroad station? — A. The nearest rail- 
road station was close to Kay. 

Q. Kay is the station below Durant. — A. Yes sir. 5 miles below Durant. 

Q. Who did your father rent from? — A. He didn't rent from anyone at 
the time. 

Q. What place did he live on? — A. He lived on a place of his own, he called 
it his own. 

Q. That was before allotment? — A. Yes sir. 

Q. You were an applicant for enrollment before the Dawes Commission be- 
fore the rolls were closed? — A. Yes sir. 

Q. Were you denied the right to enrollment as a citizen of the Choctaw 
Nation? — A. We just came here at Muskogee before the Dawes Commission 
and gave in our names. 

Q. I asked you if you were denied enrollment, were you enrolled or refused 
enrollment? — A. Refused. 

Q. Why? — A. I don't know. I can't tell you that part of it, I don't know. 

Q. Did you tell Mr. Lindly that j^ou were refused enrollment"? — A. Yes sir, 
I did. 

Q. Did you tell Mr. Lindly why you were refused enrollment? — A. No sir, I 
don't think I did. 

Q. Did you tell Mr. Lindly that all the decision you received from the Dawes 
Commission was the "too late" decision? — A. I don't remember. 

Q. You did not tell Mr. Lindly that? — A. I don't remember. 

Q. Would you tell Mr. Lindly some thing that was not true? — A. No sir. 

Q. Well it is not true, is it? — A. I don't know. 

Q. You just slated to me that you did not know why you were refused 
enrollment? — A. No sir, I don't know. 

Q. You do not mean to state now that you were refused because you were too 
late? — A. No sir, I don't know. 

Q. Did you ever receive a copy of the decision of the Dawes Commission? — 
A. No sir. 

Q. Rejecting the enrollment of your father? — A. Not mvself but my father 
did I think. 

Q. Did you see a copy of that decision? — A. No sir. 

Q. Do you know if the Connnissioner to the Five Civilized Tribes rendered 
a decision upon your father's aiiplication for enrollment, diited July 22, 1002, 
rejecting his application? — A. No sir, not that I know of. 

Q. Did your father ever apply for enrollment as a freedman? — A. No sir. I 
don't think he did. 



400 INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 

Q. Do you know whether he was ever advised to apply for enrolliiiciit :is 
a freedmaii? — A. I think he was, I heard him say he was. 

Q. Do you know whether he had any rights as a freedman? — A. No sir. lie 
says that he didn't, he never was a freedman. 

Q. Do you know how old a man your father was when he diedV — A. I tliinU 
he was 78 or 79. 

Q. Was he a slave?— A. He says he was not. 

Q. Was your mother a slave? — A. I don't know whether she was or not, I 
don't remember anything about it. 

Q. Was your mother a State woman? — A Yes sir. 

(Witness excused.) 

Lee G. Grubbs, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he reported the 
proceedings in the above-entitled case on August 10. 1915. and that the above 
and foregoing is a true and correct transcript of his stenographic notes taken 
thereof. 

Lee G. Grubbs. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 21st day of August, 1915. 
[seal.] R. p. Harrison, Clerk. 

By A. G. McMillan, Deputy. 

PETITION NO. 6. 

Statement of P. J. Hurley, Attorney for the Choctaw Nation, 
In re petition of Malissa Marcy, nee Carroll, nee Birdsonff, for the 
enrollment of herself and family as citizens by blood of the Choc- 
taw Nation. 

petition of malissa marcy, N]6e CARROLL, N6e BIRDSONG, FOR THE ENROLLMENT 
OF HERSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS BY BLOOD. 

Comes now Malissa Marcy, n6e Caroll, nee Birdsong, and shows that she 
is 47 years of age and that she lives at Boley. Okla. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, residence, and 
by recognition; that she is the daughter Adaline Birdsong, nge Sanders, who 
was about three-quarters Choctaw Indian by blood. 

That the father was a half-blood Choctaw, but was placed on the Freedman 
roll over his protest; his name was Willie Birdsong, 

That she was born in the Choctaw Nation near the Old Harris Ferry and 
grew up in the Choctaw Nation ; that on the 2.3d day of December, 1SS5, she 
married Tony Carroll, who lived across the river in Texas, and that he took 
her over into Texas and that she lived for the next 11 years on both sides of 
the river, part of the time in Texas and part of the time in the Nation. Then 
we moved to Lake West, in the Choctaw, and lived there for about 6 years; 
since which date I have lived at different places both in and out of the Choctaw 
Nation. 

That there was born to this union the following named children : Joda 
Carroll, aged 29 years, died March. 1910: Maggie Carroll, aged 27 years, died 
August 14, 3910; Delvan Carroll, aged 24 years, living; Effie Carroll, aged 23 
years, living, now INIolton ; Willie May Carroll, aged 21 years, living ; Lillie 
Carroll, aged IS years, died September, 1910. 

That after the death of Tony Carroll, September, 1914, which was after they 
had been divorced, she married William Marcy, with whom she still lives; this 
was July 8, 1899. 

That there was born to this union one child, to wit, Devoy Marcy, aged 14 
years. 

That, up till shortly before her marriage to William Marcy, she was still 
living in the Choctaw Nation; that is. applicant had no other home until after 
she married Marcy and took her to Texas and since that time she has lived 
at different places, mostly out of the Choctaw Nation. 

That during the time that I should have enrolled myself and family or looked 
after them, my family was sick and I could not go, and I .iust sent to the 
Dawes Commission a list of the children, their ages, and everything, and 
thought that that was sufficient; when I got able to go the roll was closed and 
commission never answered my letter. 

That this was all that she was able to do and all that she could do. 



INDIAN APPKOI'RIATION lill.l.. 401 

Wherefore petitioner priiys that lier naiue, Malissa Marcy. and tlie names of 
her said chihlren, Joda, Maggie, Del van, Willie May, and Lillie Carroll and 
EfBe Molton, nee Carroll, and Devoy .Marcy be placed on the approved roll of 
Choctaw Indians by blood, and that to them and to each of them be given their 
distributive share of the common property of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians, 
the same as is given to all other such citizens so enrolled. 

Malissa Marcy. 

St.\te ok Oki.ahoaia, Muskoyec Counlij, -v*"." 

Malissa Marcy, being first duly sworn, on oath states that she is the above 
named Malissa Marcy ; that she has read over the above and foregoing petition 
and knows the contents thereof, and that the matters and things therein 
contained are true. 

Malissa Marcy, 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the IGth day of March, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant and that she 
knew the contents thereof and that she stated that same was true. 

[SEAL.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Puhlic. 

(My commission expires June 2, 1917.) 



AFFIDAVIT OK ALEC NALL IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF MALISSA MARCY FOR THE 
ENROLLMENT OF HERSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS BY BLOOD. 

Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age 
and that his post office is Boggy Depot, Okla. 

That he knows the applicant, but that he has not known her very long; that 
he was well and personally acquainted with her father and mother. 

Her father was Willie Birdsong, a half-blood Choctaw Indian that was placed 
on the freedman roll over his protest ; that her mother was Adaline Sanders, 
before she married Willie Birdsong, and that she was a three-quarter Choctaw 
Indian by blood. 

That they both lived in what was old ScuUyville County, now Le Flore, near 
the line of Arkansas. 

That all of the Sanders were all recognized Choctaw Indians ; that William 
Sanders was the brother of her said mother, Adaline Birdsong, nee Sanders. 

That he does not know any of the applicant's family. 

Alec Nail (his thumb print). 

The name of Alec Nail was written by ine at his request and in his presence 
and mark made by him in ray presence. 

Julius Golden. 

State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 16th day of March, 1915. I further 
certify that I read over the above affidavit to the affiant and that he knew the 
contents thereof and that he stated that same was true and that he was the 
identical person named therein as affiant. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

(My commission expires June 2, 1917.) 



affidavit of W. M. JAMES IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF MALISSA MARCY FOR 
THE ENROLLMENT OF HERSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS BY BLOOD. 

W. M. James, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 70 years of age 
and that he lives at Beeland, Okla. 

That he first knew the ai)pli<ant near Boswell in the Choctaw Nation; that 
she is the daughter of Malissa Birdsong, who was Malissa Sanders before she 
married Birdsong. 

31302—10 20 



402 INDIAN APPEOPBIATION BILL. 

That the said Malissa Sandei's was a Choctaw Indian by blood and was 
always considered three-quarters; that I also knew her brother, William San- 
ders, and the whole Sanders family, and they were all Choctaw Indians. 

When I first knew them they were living on Sans Bios River, but when I 
last knew them they were living down on Blue River. 

The mother died down there on Blue River ; I knew the father, Willie Bird- 
song, but don't know where he died ; he was a half-breed Choctaw who was 
placed on the fi'eedman roll over his protest. 

That he was well acquainted with the first husband of the applicant. His 
name was Tony Carroll and they separated. I Icnew about the family, but not 
well enough to identify them. I know the man she lives with now at Boley, 
Okla. ; his name William Marcy. They have a boy that lives with them now 
about 14 years old. 

W. M. James (his thumb print). 

The name of W. M. James was written by me at his request and in his 
presence and mark made by him in my presence. 

Julius Golden. 

State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the IGth day of March, 1915. I further 
certify that I read over the above affidavit to the affiant and that he knew the 
contents thereof and that he stated that same was true and that he vv-as the 
identical person named therein as affiant. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

(My commission expires June 2, 1917.) 



STATEirENT OF P. J. HUKLEY, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHOCTAW NATION. 

In re petition of Mali.ssa Marcy, nee Carroll, nee Birdsong, for the enrollment 
of herself and family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

The foregoing petition of Malissa Marcy, nee Carroll, nee Birdsong, for en- 
I'ollment of herself and others as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation, was 
served upon me by Mr. Webster Ballinger, an attorney at law of AVashing- 
ton, D. C. 

Mrs. Marcy claims to be a Choctaw Indian by blood. She does not reside in 
the Choctaw Nation, but resides at the town of Boley in the Creek Nation. 
She did not make application, nor did any of the members of her family make 
application, for enrollment during the time that the rolls of citizenship of the 
(Mioctaw Nation were being prepared. As her excuse for not having made 
application during the time that the rolls were being made she states: "That 
during the time I should have enrolled myself and family, or looked after them, 
my family was sick, and I could not go and I just sent to the Dawes Commis- 
sion a list of the children, their ages and everything and thought that that was 
sufficient ; when I got able to go the roll was closed and connnission never 
answered my letter." This statement would indicate that Mrs. Marcy 's family 
had a long sick spell. The Government was engaged in the preparation of the 
rolls of the Choctaw Nation for a period of 11 years. Applications of adults were 
received from June 10, 1S96, until the close of the year 1902. Applications 
for minors born after September 25, 1902, commonly known as "new borus," 
were received up to and including July 25, 1900. INIrs. Marcy 's excuse for not 
being al)le to present her application on account of illness of her family s(>ems 
to be rendered more ridiculous when we take into consideration the fact that the 
sickness to which she refers did not prevent her from marrying her second 
husband during the j)eriod in which applications were being received. She 
swears that she was married during the year 1S99 to her present husband. 
The indications from the petitions and accompanying attidavits are that Mrs. 
Marcy was not a resident of the Choctaw Nation at the time the rolls were 
being' made, but we have not investigated to find whetlier she was or was not 
residing in the Choctaw Nation at the time of the passage of the act of June 
28, 1898. If she was in the Choctaw Nation at that time, she did not make 
application, and the act of July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. L., 041), provides as follows: 

" During the 90 days first following the date of the final ratification of this 
agreement the commission to the Five Civilized Tribes may receive applications 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 403 

for enrollment only of persons whose names are on the tribal rolls, but who 
have not heretofore been enrolled by said commission, connnonly known as 
" delinquents," and such intermarried white persons as may have married 
recognized citizens of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations in accordance with 
the tribal laws, customs, and usages on or before the date of the passage of 
this act by Congress, and such infant children as may have been born to recog- 
nized and enrolled citizens on or before the date of the final ratification of this 
agreement ; but the application of no person whomsoever for enrollment shall 
be received after the expiration of the said 90 days : Provided, That nothing 
in this section shall apply to any person or persons making application for 
enrollment as Mississippi Choctaws, for whom provision has herein otherwise 
been made." 

Even if these applicants had resided in the Choctaw Nation, and were pos- 
sessed of Indian blood, they would not, under this law, be now legally entitled 
lo enrollment, but the applicants are not Indians. They are, in fact, negroes. 
There is attjiched hereto, and marked " Exhibit A," a letter from Caesar F. 
Simmons, postmaster at Boley, Okla., where this claimant resides, saying that 
the applicant is colored. The town of Boley is populated exclusively by negroes. 

IMr. Ballinger and his associates have in this case, as in most of their 
citizenship cases, offered in support of the petition of this applicant the alfl- 
davit of Alec Nail, a professional citizenship witness. Nail is an old negro 
who signs by mark. His affidavit in support of this petition is as follows: 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of 
age and that his post office is Boggy Depot, Okla. 

"That he knows the applicant but that he has not known her very long; 
that he was well and personally acquainted with her father and mother. 

" Her father was Willie Birdsong, a half-blood Choctaw Indian that was 
placed on the Freedman roll over his protest; that her mother was Adaline 
Sanders, before she married Willie Birdsong, and that she was a three-quarter 
Choctaw Indian by blood. 

" That they both lived in what was old Scullyville County, now Leflore, 
near the line of Arkansas. 

"That nil of the Sanders were all recognized Choctaw Indians; that William 
Sanders was the brother of her said mother, Adaline Birdsong u6e Sanders. 

" That he does not know any of the applicant's family. 

"Alec Nail (his thumb-print). 
'• State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss. 

" Subscribed and sworn to before me this, the 16th day of March, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over the above affidavit to the affiant and that 
he knew the contents thereof, and that he stated that same was true, and that 
he was the identical person named therein as affiant. 

" My commission expires June 2, 1917. 

" The name of Alec Nail was written by me at his request and in his pres- 
ence, and mark made by him in my presence. 

" Julius Golden, 
" Witness to mark. 

"Attest. , 

" Witness to mark." 

On the .31st day of July, 1915, Alec Nail testified before an officer of the 
Interior Department as follows: 

"Do you know a person named Malissa Marcy, nge Carroll, nee Bird- 
song. — A. I don't know. 

" Q. There is an affidavit purported to have been made by you in which 
you are made to say that you were acquainted with this person; you say 
you do not remember such a person? — A. No, sir. 

" Q. You were made to state you were personally acquainted with her 
mother and father; that her father's name was Willie Birdsong. Do you 
recall a Willie Birdsong?— A. Yes, sir; I don't know him, but there has been 
a man up there that claims to be a Birdsong. 

" Q. You do not know that that person is the father of this applicant? — 
A. No, sir. 

" Q. You were made to state that her mother was Adaline Sanders; do you 
remember her? — A. It seems that some one was In that office by tlie name of 
Sanders. 

" Julius Golden. 

" Notart/ Puhlc. 



404 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

" Q. You iiu'iiu to say that Adaline Sanders, wlio iiiarrieil Willit' IMnlsong,. 
was the motlior of the applicant in tiiis ease? — A. No, sir; I (h)n't know 
who they was talking about. 

" Q. You do not remember this applicant?- — A. No, sir; I don't rememlier 
her ; I don't know nothing- about the Blrdsongs. 

" Q. Do you remember William Sanders? — A. No, sir." 

This testimony is, of course, a complete denial of everything contained in 
the affidavit, but there is one further allegation in the affidavit which INIr. 
Ballinger and his associates had this old negro swear to that I desire to call 
attention to. It is this: " Her father was Willie Birdsong, a half-blood Choctaw 
Indian, that was placed on tlie Freedmau roll over his protest." The old 
negro witness, when placed on the stand, of course swore that he did not know 
Willie Birdsong, but the person who prepared the affidavit was, in the usual 
manner of these attorneys, attempting to set up a relationship between this 
applicant and some person on the Clioctaw rolls, and the old negro. Alec Nail, 
is made to swear that Willie Birdsong is the father of this applicant, and is 
enrolled as a Freednian. The fact is that there is a Willie Birdsong eiu-olled 
as a P^'reedman citizen of the Choctaw Nation. His name appears opposite- 
Freedmau Roll No. 4506, but this Willie Birdsong was 9 years of age at the 
time he was enrolled, which was in 1890. This applicant swears that she 
was 47 years of age at the time she executed the foregoing petition. In other 
words, Willie Birdsong, who is alleged to be her father, would be 24 years of 
nge at this time, and his daughter, IMalissa, would be 47. This discrepancy 
would be unusual in most cases, but this firm of attorneys seems to find no 
allegations or statements of facts, however ususual and incongruous tliey may 
seem, that they can not substantiate by the testimony of their faithful wit- 
nesses, Alec Nail, AVebster Burton, and W. I\I. James. 

For the information of the connnittee, I am attaching hereto a photogra])hic- 
(!opy of Freednian census card No. 13.")2. which bears the naiue of Willie Bird- 
song, his age, and the date of his enrollment. This exhibit is marked 
" Exhibit B." 

In order to digrnfy the petition of Malissa Marcy and the affidavit of Alee 
Nail, Mr. Ballinger and his associates offer in corroboration of these two 
instruments the affidavit of W. M. James. . Mr. James is a negro criminal, 
who signs his name by mark. He is at present serving a terra in the State 
penitentiary at McAlester, Okla. Before an officer of the Interior Department 
at Muskogee, Okla., on August 6, 1915, James testified as follows: 

" You are an inmate of the county jail now, are you?- — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. AVhat crime are you charged with? — A. Check. 

" Q. What is the charge against you? — A. Identifying a check; identification. 

" Q. Is the charge for false pretense? — A. Yes, sir." 

(Since rendering this testimony the witness has been simtenced to a term in 
the penitentiary.) 

" Q. Are you acquainted with Malissa Marcy? — A. No, sir. 

" I read you an affidavit purporting to have been made by you before Julius 
Golden, a notary public, on March 16, 1915, filed by Mr. Webster Ballinger. 
with the petition for the enrollment ot IMalissa Marcy and her family as citizens 
by blood of the Choctaw Nation : 

. " W. M. Jaiues, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 70 years of 
age and that he lives at Beeland Okla. 

"That he first knew the applicant near Bowell in the Choctaw Nation; that 
she is the daughter of Malissa Birdsong, who was Malissa Sanders before she 
married Birdsong. 

"That the said Malissa Sanders was a Choctaw Indian by blood and was 
always considered three-quarters ; that I also knew her brother William 
SandVrs and the whole Sanders family and they were all Choctaw Indians. 
When I first knew them they were living on Sans Bois River; but when I last 
knew them they were living down on Blue River. 

"The mother died down there on Blue River; I knew the father Willie Bird- 
song, but don't know where he died; he was a half-breed Choctaw who was 
placed on the Freedman roll over his protest. 

"That he was well acquainted with the first husband of the applicant; his 
name was Tony Carroll and they separated; I knew about the fjimily but not 
well enough to identify them; I know the man she lives with now at Boley, 
Okla. ; his name William Marcy. They have a boy that lives with them now 
about 14 years old. 

" (Signed.) W. M. James (by thumb mark). 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 



405 



" Q. Did you make this affidavit? — A. I may liave made tliis affidavit, but I 
didn't see tliose people at all. Nail came to me and told me there was a woman 
who had been here and said I knew her. She had been here and gone. Nail 
told me who she was and I remembered seeing her at I'orum once. 

" Q. You took his word for it? — A. Yes, sir; I remember making the affidavit. 

" Q. You did not know anything about it yourself? — A. No, sir. 

" Q. You took his word that she was a Choctaw by blood? — A. Yes, sir." 

Then the reason that these applicants are not entitled to enrollment appears 
to be — 

First. They have not proven that they were residents of the Choctaw Nation 
on the 2Sth day of June, 1898, as required by law. 

Second. They did not make application for enrollment as citizens of the 
Choctaw Nation within the time required by law. 

Third. They have no Indian blood ; they are negroes. 

Fourth. The allegations of their applications are false. 

Fifth. Affidavits submitted in corroboration of the allegations of their peti- 
tions are admitted by tlie witnesses who made them to be false. 

P. J. Hurley, 
National Attorney for the Choctato Nation. 



Department of the Interior, 
United States Indian Service, 

Five Civilized Tribes. 
Mnskogee, Okla., November 3, 1915. 
Postmaster, Boley, Okla. 

Sir : Desiring to personally interview Malissa Marcy, probably wife of one 
William Marcy, in an official matter, I would thank you to promptly inform 
me, by indorsement hereon and under cover of the inclosed envelope, whether 
she resides within the delivery of your office, and, if so, whether in town or 
at what distance and in what direction in the country. If she does not reside 
within your delivery, any information you may furnish with respect to present 
post-office address and nearest town or railway station \sill be appreciated. 
Very respectfully, 

Wm. L. Bowie, 
Of Special Investigation Service, 
Office of Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes. 



Exhibit A. 

Malissa Marcy, Boley, Okla., general delivery. 
This per.son is colored. 



Caesar F. Sim.mons. P. it. 



E.XHIBIT B. 

Choctaw Nation, frccdnicn roll. 
[Residence, Kiamitia County; Post Office, Grant, I. T.; Field No. 1352.] 



Dawes 
roll 
No. 


Name. 


Relation- 
ship to per- 
son first 
named. 


Age. 


Se.x. 


Tribal enrollment. 


Slave of— 


Year. 


County. 


No. 


4502 


1. IJirdsong, Lucy Ann 

2. McDon.ild, Ida 

'A. HirdsDug, Vialet 

4. Uirdsong, Frank 

5. Hirdsonc, Willie 

f). Birdsong, Arthur... 
7. McDonald, Eddie 

(born Feb. 21, 1900). 




35 

15 
13 
11 

9 

4 

2i 


Female. . 

...do 

...do 

Male.... 

...do 

...do 

...do 


1896 

1896 
1896 
1896 
1896 
1896 


Kiamitia.. 

...do 

...do 

...do 

...do 

...do 


3619 

2566 
580 
581 
582 
583 


Sampson Foi- 
som. 


4503 
4504 


Daughter.. 

...do 

Son 

...do 

...do 

Grandson . 


4505 




4506 




4507 




4508 

















No. 1 on 1896 Choctaw as Lucy Ann Ware. 

No. 2 i.s wife of Eii McDonald, Chit ka.saw freedman card No. D53, refused. Evidence of marriage fded 
Dec. 24, 1902. 

No. 7enr(lled Dec. 24, 1902. 

Transferrpd fn m Chickasaw freedman card No. 1277. 

(Stamped:) ICnr^lIment of Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, hereon aijproved by the Secretary of the Interior June 
28, 1904. 

Da(e of application for enrollment, 9, 1899. 



406 



INDIAN APPKOPRIATJON BILL. 



[Additional information on reverse side.] 
[Printed numbers in first column refer to individual names on reverse side.] 





Name of father. 


Father's tribal enroll- 
ment. 


Father's 
owner. 


Name of 
mother. 


Mother's tribal 
enrollment. 


Mother's 




Year. 


County. 


Year. 


County. 




1 


Ed. Folsom 

Sim McCarty. . 


Dead. 


Kiamitia 

Noncitizen . 


Sampson 
Folsom. 


Rh oda 

Folsom. 

No. 1 


Died. 


Kiamitia. . 


Sampson 
Folsom. 


3 


Allen Birdsong.. 




.do. .. . 




..do 








4 


do 








...do 








5 


do 








...do 








6 


do 








.do 








7 


Eli McDonnel. . . 




Chickasaw 
freedman. 




No. 2 

























ENROLLMENT CASE NO. 9. 

Petition of Thomas F. Eubanks for Enrollment as a Citizkn by Blood of 
THE Choctaw Nation, Presented by Webster Ballinger, Attorney at 
Law — Reply and Argument of P. .T. Hurley, Attorney for the Choctaw 
Nation. 

supplemental petition of JOSEPH T. EUBANKS IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF 
THOMAS F. EUBANKS FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL. AS CHOCTAW 
INDIANS. 

Comes now .Tosepli T. Eubanks and shows : 

That lie is 25 years of age and that he lives at Ada, Okla. 

That he is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, and 
by recognition as is shown by the petition of Thomas F. Eubanks, his father, 
made in his behalf, to which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That he has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof and that 
the matters and things therein contained with reference to his relationship 
and residence and the relationship and residence of all the other descendants 
of his said father, he knows to be true of his own knowledge ; that the matters 
and tilings therein contained with reference to the ancestors of his said par- 
ents, he has always been taught was true ; that he has also been told that 
they were true by reliable persons that were personally acquainted with the 
parties and knew the facts, and that he believes them to be true and so charges 
the fact to be. 

That h(^ has been considered and recognized as a Choctaw Indian ever since 
he could remember, having been born and raised in the Choctaw. That he 
knows that his father had his home on the public domain and lived there un- 
molested. That he has never been required to pay permits but was accorded 
all the rights and recognition of the other Choctaw Indians all his life, except 
an allotment. 

That during the enrolling period of his said tribe ever since he was born he 
was a minor ; that roll was closed by operation of law long before he reached 
his ma.i'ority and although he was long past the age to have been enrolled and 
allotted his name was never placed on the roll and he was denied his allotment. 

That he has thus been deprived of his share of the common property of his 
tribe through no fault of his, but solely on account of the negligence of his 
parents, the disregard of the Choctaw Nation and the omission of the Dawes 
Commission, solely because he was a minor. 

That he now claims what he should have received during that period as in 
law, justice, and equity he is entitled. 

That his name appears in the said petition of his said father at his request 
and that ho hereby ratifies and confirms the same and joins in the prayer 
thereto appended. 

•TOSEPH T. EtTBANKS. 

State of Oklahoma, 

Payne County, ss. 
Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 29th day of April, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant and that he 



INDIAN APPKOPKIATION BILL. 407 

knew the contents thereof and that he stated that the matters and things therein 
contained were true and that he was the identical person named therein as 
petitioner. 

[sEAn.] J. w. Neil. 

Notary Public. 
(My connnission expires Mar. 31, 1918.) 



VETITIOX OF THOAfAS F. EUIJANKS FOK THE ENROLLMENT OF ITrilSKLF AM) FAMILY 
AND IN HEHALF OF HIS GBANIlCHILDREN AS CHOCTAWS HY ULOOD. 

Comes now Thomas F. Euhanlcs and sliows : 

That he is 62 years of age and tliat he lives at Alabama Avenue, South 
Okmulgee, Okla. 

That he is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, 
and l)y recognition ; that he is the son of Betsey Eubanks, nee Robbins, a three- 
quarter Choctaw Indian; that the name of my father was William Eulianks, 
a Choctaw Indian by blood ; that both said father and mother died prior to 
final enrollment. 

That his said mother had a sister named Patsie, who married a .Toe Ward, 
deceased, as is also the said Patsie. 

Tliat Daiv Rol)bins, eni'olled No. 6618, on the approved i-oll of Choctaws by 
blood, is a cousin of my said mother. 

That the enrolled relatives of his said father as shown by the approved 
roll ai-e Earnest Eubanks, enrolled opposite No. 15432, and Ella Eubanks, 
enrolled opposite No. 15954, on said roll. 

That they are the children of his said father's brother, Talt, by different 
women, as he is inforiued. 

That he was born in the Choctaw Nation near Scully ville and lived there 
until he was 4 years of age, then was taken by his said father to Texas, then 
to Arkansas, where his said father died in 1868. and that he then returned to 
the ChocUiw Nation and has since lived in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
at various places. 

That on the 30:h day of April, 1876, he was duly and lawfully married to 
liUtliie Allen, with whom he still lives ; that there was born to this union the 
following-named children, to wit: 

Caria Eubanks, age 34 years; INIaudella Star, age 32 years; Lula V. Hirrell, 
age 28 years; Joseph T. Eubanks, age 25 years; Morlin Eubanks, age 19 years; 
I^eroy Eubanks, age 17 years; Lillie H. Eubanks, age 15 years; Willie B. 
Eubanks, age 13 years. 

Children of Caria Eubanks (grandchildren) : Sammie Eubanks, age 13 
years ; Erie Eubanks, age 11 years. 

Chihlren of Maudella Star (grandchildren): Teddie Star, age 13 years; 
Eddie Star, age 11 years; Clara INIay, age 10 years. 

('hildren of Lulu V. Hirrell (grandchildren) : Ruby May Hirrell, age 10 
years. 

Petition further shows that the reason that his name and the names of his 
said family were not placed on the approved roll by tlie Dawes Commission was 
that he came to Muskogee to the Dawes Commission for the purpose of enroll- 
ment of himself and fjimily; that he met one of his Indian neighbors that had 
l>i-ecede(l him and was tohl l)y him that he had to pay $60 to get to the Dawes 
Commission ; that that was what he had to pay. 

When I went there I expected to pay the $60, as he had informed me, and the 
small man — I can't give Ids name — met me at the door and collected from me 
the $60, and I went before the commission and they told me that they would 
Lotify me when to come back; then the same small man told me that I would 
have to pay $500 per capita for the enrollment of myself and family. I just 
simply did not have the money, as I was a poor man, and I went home; tlion, 
after the roll was closed, the connnission notified mo to return; but I learned 
tluit '•he roll was closed, through the paper, and thought it useless to come. 

Petitioner further shows that he had always been recognized as a Choctaw 
Indian and enjoyed all the privileges as such that the other Choctaw Indians 
had. 

That he built him a home on the public domain 10 ndles Avest from Ada and 
put in cultivation 160 acres which he lived on until it was allotted away from 
me, unmolested. 



408 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

" I knew that I was a Choctaw Indian and never entertained any idea that 
for any reason that I would be deprived of my right and dispossessed of my 
home on wliicli I had lived for nine years, as a Choctaw Indian, unmolested and 
recoj;nize(l." 

Petition furllier shows, tliat the enrollment by the Dawes Connnission, on 
the final roll, of the descendants from the same common ancestor as here- 
tofore mentioned in this petition, is a final adjudication and a full determina- 
tion of tlie ri5,'hts of this applicant and his lineal descendants to be enrolled. 

That if flH\v were entitled, which applicant admits, he is also entitled and 
if he is not entitled, their names should be stricken from the I'oll. 

That his said tribe never notified him that his recognition would ever cease 
or that for any reason he was required to protect his birthright or make proof 
of his blood as a Choctaw. 

That he did everything that he was able to do and knew how to do, with 
the result that his said tribe took advantage of his ignorance, the Dawes 
('ommission disi-egarded his application, and him and his family, all of whom 
were citizens by birth, were omitted from the roll. 

Wherefore petitioner prays that his name, Thomas F. Eubanks and the said 
names of his children, Carria Eubanks, Maudella Star, Lulu V. V. Hirrell, 
Joseph T., Morlin, Ler(jy, IJllie H., and Willie R. P^ubanlvS ; also the names of 
his said grandchildren, Sammie and Erie I']ubanks, and Teddie, Eddie, and 
Clara Star, and lluby May Hirrill, be placed on the approved roll of Choctaw 
Indians by blood, and that to them and to each of them be given their dis- 
tributive share of the conmion property of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians, the 
same as is given to all other Choctaws by blood. 

Thomas F. Eubanks. 
State of Oklahoma, 

MusJcotjee Comity, ss: 

Thomas F. Eubanks, being first duly sworn, on oath states, that he is the 
above named Thomas F. Eubanks ; that he has read over the above and fore- 
going petition and knows the contents, and the matters and things tlierein 
contained ai'e true. 

Thomas F. Eubanks. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 26th day of March, 19L5 ; I further 
certify that I read over to the affiant the above petition and that he knows 
the contents thereof, and that he stated that same was true. 

rr>. s.] JuT.ius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

(My connnission expires June 2, 1917.) 



SUi'PLEME.NTAI. i'ETITIO.X OF (AKIA M. EUIiANKS IN SUl'l'OKT OK THE PETITION OF 
THOMAS F. EI'BAMsS FOK THE ENROLLME.XT OF HISISEI.F ET AI,. AS CHOCTAW 
INDIANS. 

Comes now (Jaria M. Eubanks and shows: 

That he is ;>4 years of age and that his present i)ost office is Santa Harbara, 
Cal. 

That he is a Choctaw Indian by blood, by descent, by residence, and by recog- 
nition, as is shown by the petition of Tliomas F. Eubanks, his father, made in 
Ills behalf, to which (his petition is attached and made a part. 

That he has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof, and that 
the matters and things therein contained with reference to his relationship and 
residence and the relationship and residence of all the other descendants of his 
said parents named therein he knows to be true of his own knowled.ge. 

That the matters and things therein contained with reference to the ancestors 
of his said parents he has always been taught were true ; that he has also 
been told that they were (rue by reliable persons that were personally ac- 
quainted with the parties and knew the facts, and that he believes them to be 
true, and so charges the fact to be. 

That on the — day of February, 1901, he was duly and lawfully married to 
Evaline Owens; that (here was born to this union the following-named children, 
to wit: Sammie Eubanks, born August 11, 1902; Erie Eubanks, l)orn Fel)ruarv 
2. 1905. 

Thnt both of said children are living and live witli the petitioner at above 
stated place of residence. 



INDIAN API'HOPHIATION BII.T.. 409 

Tliat lie lias luvn considered and recognized as a Choctaw Indian ev«>r since 
ho could ronuMiiiier ; that he helped his said father to clear up the place on the 
puhiic domain descrihed in his petition. That he lived on llu> jiiaco aftci- he 
was married and until it was allotted away from them. That during all the 
years that they lived there as Choctaw Indians they were not niolesled or re- 
quired to pay permits. 

That he waited for his father to enroll himself and family until it was too 
late for him to make an application ; the roll was closed. 

That his name appears in the said petition of his father, and also the names 
of his said children at his request, and that he hereby ratifies and confirms the 
same and juins in the prayer thereto app(>nded. 

Cakta Etjbanks. 
State tti' Cai.ifoknia, Santa Barbara Vountii, fis. 

Subscribed and sworn to before nie this the 8th day of April, 1915. I further 
certify that I read over the above petition to the afliant and that he knew the 
contents thereof and that he stated that the same was true, and that be was the 
identical person named therein as the petitioner. 

[SKAL.l <}• IM. MOLEY. 

Nulary Vuhllc in and for the Coirnty of Santa BarJxira. 

Stat'' of California. 
(My commission expires Afar. 9, 1918.) 



SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION OF MAUDETJ.A START, IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF 
THOJIAS F. EUBANKS FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET AL., CHOCTAW 
INDIANS. 

Comes now Maudella Start and shows — 

That she is 32 years of age and that she lives 3 miles northwest from Max- 
well. Okla. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, and 
by recognition, as is shown by the petition of Thomas P. Eubanks, her father, 
made in her behalf, to which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That she has read over said petition and knows the contents thereof and that 
the matters and things therein with reference to her relationship and residence 
and the relationship and residence of all the other parties named therein, she 
knows of her own knowledge; that the matters and things therein contained 
with reference to the ajicestors of her parents, she has always been taught 
were true ; that she has also been told that they were true by reliable persons 
who were personally acquainted with the parties and knew^ the facts, and that 
she believes them to be true and so charges the fact to be. 

That on the 14th day of May, 1899. she was duly and lawfully married to 
James Start : that there was born to this union the following named children, 
to wit: Teddie Start, boi-n October 12, 1900; Eddie Start, born September 9, 
1902 ; Clara Start, born October 18, 1905. 

That all the above-named children are alive and liv(^ with their said parents 
at the above-stated place of residence. 

Petitioner further shows that she has been considered and recognized as a 
Choctaw Indian ever since she could remember, having been born and raised 
in the Choctaw Nation on the public domain that her father had improved. 

That she, like the others of her said father's family, depended on him to en- 
roll her, and as he did not succeed she made no application. 

That her name an<l the names of her said children ai)pear in the said petition 
of her father at her request, and that .she hereby ratili(>s and confirms the 
same and joins in the prayer thereto appended. IVIauo Start. 

State of Oklahoma, Mnslcofirc County, ss : 

Subscribed and swoi-n to helore me this the 3d day of April. 191."). I further 
certify that I read over the above petition to the athant and that she knew the 
contents thereof and that sh.e stated that same was true and that she was the 
identical person nanieil therein as petitioner. 

TSeal.I Julius Colden. 

Notav}! rirl)lir. 

(My commission expires June 2. 1917.) 



410 INDIAN APrKOPKlATION BUA.. 

SUPPLEMENTAL PETITION OF LULA HIRKILL IN SUPPOKl OF THE PETITION THOMAS V. 
EUBANKS FOn THE ENROLLMENT OF HIMSELF ET. AL. AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Comes now Lulu HiiTill tuid shows: 

Thiit she is 28 years of age, and that she lives in Alabama Avenue. South 
Okmulgee, Okla. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, 
and by recognition, as shown by the petition of Thomas F. Eubanks, her 
father, made in her behalf, to which this petition is attached and made a part. 

That she has read over said i)etltion and know^s the contents thereof, and 
that the matters and things therein contained with reference to her relationship 
and residence and the relationship and residence of all the otlier descendants 
of her said father, ?he knows of her own knowledge to be true; that the 
matters and things therein contained with reference to ancestors of her said 
parents, she has always been taught were true; that she has also been told 
that they were true by reliable persons that were personally acquainted with 
the parties and knew the facts, and that she l)elieves them to be true, and so 
charges the fact to be. 

That on the 22d day of March, 1903. she was duly and lawfully married to 
Henry Hirrill ; that there w\as born to this union the following-named child, 
to wit : Ruby May Hirrill. born July 14, 1905. and is still living. 

That she has been considered and recognized as a Choctaw Indian ever since 
she could remember, having been born and raised in the Choctaw Nation; that 
she lived with her said father on the public domain until the same was allotted 
away from him; that prior to allotment they all lived on the public domain 
unmolested. 

That her name and the name of her said child appears in the petition of 
her said father at her request, and thnt she hereby ratifies and confirms the 
same and joins in the prayer thereto appended. 

Lulu Hiuuill. 
State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the od day of April, 1915. I further 
certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant, and that she knew 
he contents thereof, and that she stated that same was true, and that she was 
the identical person named herein as peitioner. 

[seal] Julius Golden, 

'Notary Piihlic. 

My commission expires June 2, 1917. 



affidavit of ISAAC FULSOME IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF THOMAS F. EUBANKS 

for the enrollment of himself et al. as choctaws by blood. 

State of Oklahoma, 

Comity of Garvin, ss.: 
Isaac Fulsome, being by me first duly sworn, deposes and says that Thomas 
Franklin Eubanks is the son of William Eubanks and Betsey P^ibanks, nee 
Robins, and that Betsy Eubanks, nee Robins, is a cousin of mine by blood, me 
being a full-blood Choctaw Indian, and further states that I have known the 
above stated parties all my life and have always known them to be Choctaw 
Indians. 

(Signed) Isaac Fulsome. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 9th day of January, 1915. 

(Signed) C. H. IMassey, 

Notary Public. 



afl'ldavtt of johnson gift in support of the petition of thomas f. eubanks 
for the enrollment of himself et al. as choctaw indians. 

Stafford, Okla. 
This is to certify that I am an Indian by blood ; that I am well acquainted with 
Thomas F. Eubanks and his family ; that he is a Choctaw by blood ; and that 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL, 411 

he held hind under the public domain until it was allotted away from him, and 
have always known him and his family to he Choctaws. 

(Signed) Johnson Gift. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 24th day of April, 1915. 

(Signed) C. H. Massey, 

Notary Ptihlic. 
(My commission expires March 3d, 1917.) 

AFFIDAVIT OF ALKC NAIL IN SUl'POKT OF THE PETITION OF THOMAS F. EUBANKS FOR 
THE ENROLLMENT OF HI>[SET,F AND FAMILY AND GRANDCHILDREN AS CHOCTAW 
INDIANS. 

Alec Nail, l)eing first duly sworn, on oath states : 

That he is 72 years of age, and that he lives at 1206 South Third Street, 
Muskogee, Okla. 

That he has recently met the applicant, and that he is well and personally 
ac(iuainted with the Choctaw Indians that he claims to have been his ancestors. 

That his said father, William Eubanks, was the son of Old .Toe Eubanks, 
and that they were always counted full blood. They lived like full bloods. They 
lived about 4 miles east of Fort Towson, where I lived until I was 12 years old. 
I further know that some of the same family moved up to near Old Scullyville, 
where the applicant says he was born. 

I knew Betsey Robins, the woman that he says is his mother, and have been 
told that she married a Eubanks. In fact, it was generally known that she 
married a Eubanks. She lived in huts just like the other full bloods, and was 
counted a full blood. 

All the above persons referred to were Choctaw Indians, and all lived in 
either the Choctaw or Chickasaw nations. 

Affiant further states that he has heard read the affidavit of Old Isaac 
Pulsom, with whom he is well and personally acquainted, and if there had been 
any doubts about the parties being Indians he would never have given them 
such an affidavit. 

Alec. Nail (his thumb print). 

The name of Alec. Nail was written by me at his request and in his presence, 
and mark made by him in my presence. 

Julius Golden, witness to clerk. 
State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 26th day of March, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over and fully explained the above affidavit to the 
affiant, and that he knew the contents thereof, and that he stated that same was 
true, and that he was the identical person named therein as ffiant. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary rublic. 

(My commission exjiires June 2, 1917.) 



STATEMENT OF P. J. HURLEY, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHOCTAW NATION. 

A copy of a petition was served on me l)y Mr. Webster Ballinger, an attorney 
at law, of Washington, D. C, for the enrollment of Thomas P. Eubanks et ai. 
as citizens by blood of tlie ('lioctaw XatioiL 

Thomas F. Eubanks claims to be a citizen by blood of the Choctaw Nation 
and petitions that himself and family be enrolled as such. He claims to be 
related to certain persons whose names appear upon the approved roll of the 
Choctaw Nation. Thomas F. Eubanks swears to the following statement: 

"That he was born in the Choctaw Nation, near Scullyville, and lived there 
until he was 4 years of age; then was taken by his .said father to Texas, then 
to Arkansas, where his said father died in 1S6S. and that he then returned to 
the Choctaw Nation and has since lived in the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations 
at various places." 

Eubanks's address at the present time is Okmulgee, Okla., which is not in 
the Choctaw Nation. 

Eubanks states that he was always recognized as a Choctaw Indian and 
enjoyed all the privileges of citizenship in said tribe; that he made application 



412 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

to the Dawes Commission for enrollment for himself and his family ; that he 
did evorythinj; he was able to do and knew how to do to secure his rights, hut 
that advantaf?e was taken of him on account of his ignorance, and that the 
Dawes Connuission disregarded liis application for himself and the nieiiiljers of 
his family, and that they were all omitted from the roll. 

It appears from the records of the oflice of the Commission to tlie Five 
Civilized Tribes tluit Thomas F. Eubanks and his family were ;ii)i)licaiits for 
identification as ^Mississippi Choctaws in case No. K. 553G. It liappeus also 
that in said mentioned case the testimony of Tliomas F. Eubanks was talien 
before the Connuission to the Five Civilized Tribes at Muskogee, Ind. T., on 
May 10, 3902. L. P. Hudson appeared at said liearing as attorney for the 
applicants. It is necessary for me to quote here a few lines of Kul)anks's 
testimony before tlie commission on tlie date above mentioneil to show the 
absolute disregard for the truth evidenced in tliat part of Eubanks's petition 
filed by IMr. Ballinger, whicli I have quoted above. 

" (,). ^^'llat is youi- nanieV — A. Thomas F. Eul)anks. 

" ' i. How old are you? — A. I am 49 years old. 

'■ (}. Wiiiit is your post-office addi-ess?— A. Asher, Okla. 

"<i. How long liave you lived at Aslier? — A. About six months. 

'• (}. Wliere did you live before that? — A. In the Chickasaw Nation. 

■' Q. How h)ng did you live in tiie Chickasaw Nation?— A. 18 years. 

" Q. ^^■hcre did you live befcwe you lived there? — A. In Texas. 

" (). How many years did you live in Texas? — A. I was raised tliere. 

" (). \\'cre you Ixirii in Tt'xas? — A. I was born in Arkansas, and went from 
there to Texas." 

In his petition filed by Mr. Ballinger, a copy of which is before me, and wliich 
is dated the 2t)th day of jMarch, 1015, Eubanks swears " thnt he was born in 
tlie Choctaw Nation near Scullyville and lived there until he was 4 years of 
age." This iri'econcilal)le conflict between the two sworn statements of Mr. 
P"ul);inks would seem to estaltlish the degree of confidence that should be placed 
in any of his statements. If there is a question as to which statement should 
be given ci-ed<'iic(' Mr. Hallingcr will probably call attention to the fact that the 
last statement made by Air. Eubanks is supported by the affidavit of Mr. Bal- 
inger's star \sitn(>ss, Alec Nail, who signs by mark. 

We iiave read so many affidavits concerning difTerent applicants, their i-ights, 
tlu'ir degree of tilood, their family relationship, their jilace of residence, and their 
ages, made by this witness, that we are confident that for proper consideration 
he can swear to more facts concerning applicants who (lesire enrollment as 
Choctaw citizens than any person who has ever been used as a professional 
witness in citizenship mattei's. Mr. Ballinger seems to have discovered a 
genius as a witness wlien he discovered Alec Nail. 

The record in this case show that the applicants claim as Mississippi Clioc- 
taws. Thomas F. Eubanks states in his testimony, taken in 3902, that he 
claimed through his mother whom he alleges, was a Mississippi Choctaw of 
one-fourtli blood. That would malve Thomas F. Eubanks a one-eighth blood, 
his children, one-sixteenth blood, and his grandchildren, who are applicants, 
one thirty-second blood, but he was unable to prove that his mother was in 
reality a Choctaw at all. He was not al)le to prove that she complied or 
attempted to comply with the provisions of the fourteenth article of the treaty 
of 1830. Even if his mollier had been a Mississippi Choctaw she would not 
have been entitled to enrollment unless she could make such proof. No IMis- 
sissippi Clioctaws were entitled to enrollment unless they were enrolled under 
the so-cnlled full-blood rule, which permitted the enrollment of full-blood 
Mississippi Clioctaws, or could prove conclusively that they were descendants 
of a patentee or scriptee or one of those jiersons on the supplemental scheilule 
who complied or attempted to comply with the provisions of the fourteenth 
article of the treaty of 1830. The records show that this claimant failed 
absolutely to make such proof. They were riglitly denied enrollment by the 
Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes. The petitioner makes the following 
statement in his ])etition : 

" Petitioner further shows : that the reason that his name and the names 
of his family were not placed on the approved roll by the Dawes Commission 
was : that he came to Muskogee to the Dawes Commission for the purpose of 
enrollment of himself and family ; that he met one of his Indian neighbors 
w ho had i)receded him and was told by him that he had to pay $G0 to get to 
the Dawes Commission, that that was what he had to pay. 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 413 

"When I went there I expected to pay $60 as he had informed me aiul that 
the small man — I can't give his name — met me at the door and collected from 
me the $G0, afid I went before the commission and they told me that they 
woidd notify me when to come back ; then the same small man told me that 
I would have to pay .$50 per capita for the enrollment of myself and family." 

Of course the petitioner had an attorney to appear for him in the case but 
it is probable that he did pay money to some one who was conducting a 
fraudulent citizenship biu-eau, and that he was asked for money. There are 
many cases in which claimants who were not enrolled, and not entitled to en- 
rollment, were led by unscrupulous lawyers to believe that they, the lawyers, 
had the power to enroll them, and that they could be enrolled by paying a 
certain amount of money. I have no doubt but that some of these lawyers 
led the applicants to believe that they, the lawyers, wei-e in reality the Com- 
mission to the Five Civilized Tribes, and that the ignorant applicants some- 
times believed they were bribing the commission when in fact they were not 
in the presence of the commission at all. I am informed that this practice was 
continued even after the rolls were closed, and there is some evidence to show 
that the same kind of fraud has been practiced within tiie last year. 

In fact, the firm of IJallinger, Lindley & Ilodkey have offices in the same 
building with the offices of the Superintendent to the Five Civilized Tribes, at 
Muskogee, Okla., and I have in my possession evidence to show that many 
claimants for citizenship were led to believe that this firm of attorneys is con- 
nected with the Government ; that the rolls of citizenship have been reopened, 
and that these gentlemen are engaged in the business of enrolling applicants 
for the Government. In this connection I refer to a report made by Mr. 
AYilliam L. Bowie, a special inspector in the service of the superintendent to 
the Five Civilized Tribes. 

In order to convince the committee that Tlunnas F. Eul)anks and his family 
were not deprived of their right by reason of the conduct of any fraudulent citi- 
zenship bureau, I am attaching hereto a complete and certified copy of the tes- 
timony of Thomas l'\ Fubanks taken before the Conuuission to the Five ('ivil- 
ized Tribes at Muskogee, Ind. T., May 10, 1902; also a complete and certified 
copy of the decision of the Comnnssion to the Five Civilized Tribes in the case 
of Thomas F. Eubanks and others on November 1. 1902. 

These papers show conclusively that Thomas F. Eubanks was denied enroll- 
ment as a citizen of the Choctaw Nation after a full and fair hearing, and was 
denied — first, because he was unable to prove that he was of Indian descent ; 
second, because he claimed as a Mississippi Choctaw and was unable to show 
that, as such, any of his iincestors had complied or attempted to comply with the 
fourteentli article of the treaty of IH'M. 

We have shown elsewhere in this argument that tlu> statements made by 
Thomas F. Eubanks in the petition un<ler consideration are false. We have 
proven the statements contained in the petition to be false by the testimony of 
the petitioner himself whi('h was taken in his c;ise, wlnle the same was pend- 
ing before the Conuuission to the Five Civilized Tribes; but, in corroboration of 
the false statements contained in the petition submitted by Thomas F. Eubanks, 
Mr. Ballinger and his associates have presented an afildavit signed by Alec Nail, 
an old negro, who signs by luark. The affidavit of Alec Nail is in full as 
follows : 

"Affidavit of Alec Nail in supixu't of the petition of Thomas F. I^ubanks for the 
enrollment of himself antl family and grandchildren as Choctaw Indians. 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn on oath, states that he is 72 years of age 
and that he lives at 1200 South Third Street, Muskogee, Okla. 

"That he has recently met the applicaid:. and that he is well and personally 
acquainted with the Choctaw Indians that he claims to have been his ancestors. 

"Tliat his said father. William Eubaidcs, was the .son of old Joe Eubanks, and 
that they were always conidcd full blood; they lived like full bloods. They 
lived alM>ut 4 miles east of Fort Tow.son, whei-e I lived until I was 12 years old. 
I further know that some of the same family moved up to near oid Scully- 
ville, where the api)licant says he was born. 

" I knew Betsey Itobins, the woman that he says is his mother, and have 
been told that she married a Eub.-inks; in fact, it was generally known that 
she married a Eubanks; she lived in huts ju.st like the other full blon.ls and 
was counted a full blood. 

"All the above persons referred to were Choctaw Indians .-ind :ill lived in 
either the Choctaw or Chickasaw Nation. 



414 INDIAN APPEOrEIATION KILL. 

" Affiant furtlK>r states that he has heard read the affidavit of ohl Isaac 
Fulsom, with wiiom lie is well and personally acquainted, and if there had 
been any doubts about the pai'ties being Indians he would never liave given 
them sucla an affidavit. 

"(Signed) At.ec Nail (by marlc). 

" State of Oklahoma, Muskoyee Cotinly, ss: 

" Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 2Gth day of March, 1915. I fur- 
tlier certify that I read over and fully explained the aljove affidavit to the affiant, 
and that he knew the contents thereof, and that he stated that same was true, 
and tliat lie was the identical person named therein as affiant. 

" [seal.] (Signed) Julius Golden, 

".Notary Public. 

"(My commission expires June 2, 1917.)" 

As stated in other cases which I have pi-esented, Alec Nail is one of the 
professional witnesses used by Ballinger, Lindloy & Rodkey. His affidavit 
here corroborates the false statements contained in the petition which has 
been filed by Mr. Ballinger for Thomas P. Eubanks. The statements in this 
affidavit, like the statements in the petition, are in direct conflict with tlie 
true facts in this case, as shown by the certified copy of the evidence taken 
before the Commission of the Five Civilized Tribes, and the decision of that 
commission, which are attached liereto. 

When Alec Nail was asked to testify on this subject on July 31, 1915, after 
having first been duly sworn, he testified as follows : 

" Q. Do you know a man by the name of Thomas F. Eubanks? — A. Yes, sir; 
know him since he has been coming up to this ottice. 

" Q. You never saw him before? — A. No, sir. 

" Q. Was there a white man by this name who came up to this office to make 
application? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. Do you know where he lives? — A. No, sir; somewhere in the Creek 
Nation. 

" Q. How old a man is he? — A. He looks he is about HO or .55 years old — as 
old as I am. 

" Q. You say you never saw this man until he asked you to be a witness for 
liini? — A. No, sir; did not know him when this man asked me if I had met him. 

" Q. Did you know his parents? — A. No, sir; I forgot what he said; he 
claimed Ivin to some Indian family. 

" Q. Do you know Joe Eubanks? — A. Is a Choctaw? 

" Q. Do you know Joe Eubanks? — A. No, sir; I don't reckon so. 

" Q. Did you ever Ivuow William Eubanks? — A. Yes, sir; I think so. 

" Q. Y''ou think? — A. Am not positive. 

" Q. Do you know where he lives? — A. No, sir. He used to live close to 
Wheelock. 

" (}. Is Wheelock close to Fort Towson? — A. Yes, sir; in Towson County." 

Again in the same testimony, after having heard the affidavit above quoted 
read, the witness testified as follows: 

" Q. You state in this afiidavit th;vt William Eubanks was this applicant's 
father ; that he was the son of old Joe Eubanks, and you have just stated to 
me that you did not know this person? — A. Well, not to my mind; but if you 
call over their names I could recall them. I never knew nothing of the Eubanks 
until they came in. 

" Q. Was this affidavit read over to you before you made your thumb print 
thereon? — A. They read them over. I don't know what they were doing." 

Again, in the same testimony, the witness was asked : 

" Q. Do you remember what was given you for making this particular affi- 
davit?— A. No, sir; I don't. It was not much." 

P. J. HUIU.EY, 
Ndtioxnl Atlonicii for thr Choctnir Notion. 



Department ok Tin; I.xtekiou, 
Commission to the Five Civilizkd Trihes, 

Muskogee, Ind. T., May 10, 1902. 

In the matter of the application of Thomas F. Eubanks for the identification 
of hiiiLself and his six minor children, Louisa Y. Eubanks, Joseph Thomas 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION ]iILL. 415 

Eubanks, Marlin Marcus Eubaiik.s, Roy Lee Eubanlis, I.illio Ilortense Kubanks, 
Willie Belle Eubanks, as Mississippi Choctaws. 
L. P. Hudson appeared as attorney for applicants. 

THOMAS F. EUBANKS, being first duly sworn, testified as follows: 
Examination by the Commission: 

Q. What is your name? — A. Thomas F. Eubanks. 

Q. How old you? — A. I am 49 years old. 

Q. What is your post-office address? — A. Asher, Oklahoma. 

Q. How long have you lived at Asher? — A. About six months. 

Q. Where did you live before that? — A. In the Chickasaw Nation. 

Q. How long did you ilve in the Chickasaw Nation? — A. Eighteen years. 

Q. Where did you live before you lived there? — A. In Texas. 

Q. How many years did you live in Texas? — A. I was raised there. 

Q. Were you born in Texas? — A. I was born in Arkansas and went froni 
there to Texas. 

Q. Is your father living? — A. No sir. 

Q. Is your mother liver? — A. No, sir. 

Q. What was your father's name? — A. William Eubanks. 

Q. What was your mother's name? — A. Elizabeth Eubanks. 

Q. Through which parent do you claim Choctaw blood? — A. My mother. 

Q. How much Choctaw blood do you claim? — A. One-eighth. 

Q. Has your mother ever been recognized in any way or enrolled as a citizen 
of the Choctaw Nation in Indian Tei-ritory? — -A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Are you married? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is your wife living? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is she an Indian or white woman? — A. She is a white woman. 

Q. What is her name? — A. Ruthie Ellen Eubanks. 

Q. Do you make any claim for her? — A. No, sir. 

Q. How many children have you under age and unmarried? — A. I have six. 

Q. Give me the name of the oldest one. — A. Louisa \. Eubanks. 

Q. How old is she? — A. Fifteen years old. 

Q. The next one? — A. Joseph Thomas Eubanks. 

Q. How old is he?— A. Thirteen. 

Q. Next? — A. Marlin Marcus Eubanks. 

Q. How old is he? — A. Eight years old. 

Q. Next one? — A. Roy Lee Eubanks. 

Q. How old is he? — A. Six years old. 

Q. Next one? — A. Lillie Hortense Eubanks. 

Q. How old? — A. Four years old. 

Q. Next?— A. Willie Belle Eubanks. 

Q. How old? — A. One year old. 

Q. You claim for yourself and these six children? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q, Is Ruthie Ellen Eubanks the mother of these children? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Are you and your wife living together and these children with you? — 
A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Were either of you married before you married each other? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you the proof of your marriage with you? — A. No, but I suppose 
I can get it. 

A reasonable time will be allowed applicant in which to supply the proof of 
his marriage. 

Q. Is your name or the names of any of your children on any of the tribal 
rolls of the Choctaw Nation in Indian Territory? — A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Have you ever made application for citizenship for yourself and children 
in the Choctaw^ Nation either to the Choctaw tribal authorities or to the United 
States authorities in Indian Territory? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you ever api)lied to the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes for 
enrollment of yourself and children under the act of Congress of June 10, 
189G?— A. No, sir. 

Q. Is this the first application you have ever made to any authority what- 
ever for the enrollment of yourself and children as citizens of the ('hoctaw 
Nation? — A. Yes, sir. Except as I .spoke to Judge Hudson this morning; three 
years ago I wrote to the Secretary of the Interior and sent the names of my 



416 INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL. 

family, and lie wrote to me to go to the Dawes Coiiimissiou with my application. 

Q. What did you do?— A. I did not go before the Dawes Commission, because 
there were so many sharks over there where I was who wanted to ri^present 
me tliat I woidd not have anytliing to do with them. I did not do anytliing 
more aljout it. 

Q. Do you now come before tlie connnissiou to identify yourself and children 
as Mississippi CHioctaws, claiming under article 14 of the treaty of 1830? — A, 
Yes, sir. 

Q. Do you understand thai articit- of tliat treaty? — A. 1 lliiiik so. 

It reads as follows : 

"Each Choctaw head of a family being desirous to remain and become a 
citizen of the States shall be permitted to do so by signifyiitg his intention to 
the agetit within six luonths froiu the ratification of tliis treaty, and he or she 
slial! thereupon be entitled to a reservation of one .section of six hundred and 
forty acres of land to be boiuided by sectional lines of survey ; in like manner 
shall be entitled to one-half that quantity for each unmarried child which is 
living with him over 10 years of ago and a (luarter section to such child as 
may be under 10 years of age. to a<l,ioin the location of the parent. If they 
reside upon said lands intending to become citizens of the States for five years 
after the ratification of this treaty, in that case a grant in fee simple shall 
issue. Said reservation shall include the present improvement of the head of 
the family or a portion of it. Persons who claim luider this article shall not 
lose the privilege of a Choctaw citizen, Init if they ever remove are not to be 
entitled to any portion of the Choctaw amuiity." 

Q. Do you understand that now? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. \Vhat is the name of your Choctaw ancestor through whom you claim the 
right to be identified as a ^Ilssissii)pi ('hoctaw? — A. Elizabeth Robbins. 

Q. Did any of your Choctaw ancestors comply or attempt to comply in any 
way with the provisions of that article of that treaty? — A. I can not tell you; 
I don't know. 

(}. Did Elizabeth Itobliins live in .Mississi])])i in ISrJO, or in .Mabama? — A. I 
can not tell you. 

(}. Where was she living at that time? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Did she ever live in Mississippi? — A. Yes, sir. She claimed she lived in 
Mississi])pi. 

Q. Can you give me the names of any of your ancestors who lived in ^Missis- 
sii)pi or Alabama in 1830 and was the head of a family there? — .\. I can not. 

Q. How much Choctaw blood did Elizabeth Rob!)ins have? — A. My mother 
was a quarteroon, a quarter blood Choctaw. 

(). What was your mother's maiden name? — A. Elizabeth Robbins. 

(>. Did she claim through her mother or father? — A. She claimed through her 
mother. 

Q. What was her mother's name? — A. Gaffey, to the best of my recollection. 

Q. What was her first name? A. They called her Nellie. 

Q. Nellie Caffey was her maiden name before she luarried Robl)ins? — A. 
Yes ; her married name was Nellie Robbins. 

Q. Did Nellie Caffey or Nellie Robl)ins have Indian Idood? — A. She claimed 
to have ; yes, sir. 

Q. Did she live in Mississippi or Alabama in 1S.S0? — A. It .seems to me that 
she did live in Mississippi and went from there to Texas. . 

Q. Do you know whether she lived in IMississip])! in 1830 and had a family 
there then? — A. I don't know whether she did or not at that time. 

Q. Did any of your Choctaw ancestors own or claim any lands in the old 
Choctaw Nation under ai-ticl(> 14 of the treaty of 1830?— A. Not that I know of. 

Q. Did any of your Choctaw ancestors within six months after the treaty of 
1830 was ratified go to the United States Indian agent, Col. Ward, and tell him 
that they wanted to remain in Mississippi, take lands there, and become citizens 
of the States?— A. I don't know. 

Q. Did any of them own any improvements on lands in Mississippi or Ala- 
bama in 1830?— A. I don't know. 

Q. Did any of your Choctaw ancestors go with the other Indians from the 
Choctaw Nation east of the Mississippi River to the Choctaw Nation in Indian 
Territory between 1833 and 1838 and 1840-?— A. Not that I know of. 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 417 

Q. Did any of your Choctaw ancestors within six months after the ratifica- 
tion of the treaty* of 1830 go to the United States Indian agent. Col. Ward, and 
tell him the wanted to stay, take lands, and become citizens of the States? — A. 
I don't know. 

Q. In 1837 and 1842 commissions were appointed by Congress which went to 
Mississippi and heard claimants under article 14 of the treaty of 1830. Many 
of the Choctaw Indians who went to Col. Ward in accordance with the provi- 
sions of article 14 and signified their intention of remaining and becoming citi- 
zens were not put upon his list, known as "Ward's register," and his failure to so 
put them upon his record caused many to lose both their land and improvements, 
for both were taken from them and sold by the Government at its public land 
sales. These commissions went to Mississippi to hear the claims of those who 
had had land or improvements taken from them by the Government and sold. 
Do you know whether any of your ancestors went before either of these 
commissions and claimed benefits under article 14 of the treaty of 1830? — A. I 
don't know. 

Q. Did any of your Choctaw ancestors receive any scrip from the Government 
which was issued under the act of Congress of August 23, 1842, and which en- 
titled the holders to select lands from the vacant Government lands in Missis- 
sippi, Alabama, Louisiana, or Arkansas to take the place of those which had 
l3een taken by the Government and sold? — A. I don't know. 

Q. Have you any relatives or kinsfolk who have been before the commission 
to be identified as Mississippi Choctaws? — A. None that I know of. 

Q. You are not related to Benjamin F. Brock, are you? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Have you any other evidence you will want to introduce later? 

(L. P. Hudson, attorney for applicant, asks leave to file written evidence in 
support of this application in the near future. 

Motion allowed by the commission.) 

Q. Do you speak or understand the Choctaw language? — A. No, sir. I know 
very little about it. 

This applicant has the appearance and physical characteristics of being 
descended from white parentage; has dark complexion, somewhat tanned; 
brown eyes and black hair ; he has no knowledge of the Choctaw language and 
no knowledge of any compliance on the part of any of his ancestors with any 
of the provisions of article 14 of the treaty of 1830. 

S. A. Apple, being duly sworn, on his oath states that as stenographer to 
the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes he reported the above proceedings 
on May 10, 1902; and that foregoing is a true and correct transcript of his 
stenographic notes in same, to the best of his knowledge and ability. 

S, A. Apple. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this 15th day of May, 1902. 
[SEAT..] Charles H. Sawyer, 

'Notary Puhlic. 



Department of the Interior, 
Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes. 

In the matter of the application of Thomas F. Eubanks et al, for identification 
as Mississippi Choctaws. M. C. R. 5536. 

DECISION. 

It appears from the record herein that application for identification as 
Mississippi Choctaws was made to this commission by Tliomas F. Eubanks 
for himself and his six minor children, Louisa V., Joseph Thomas, Marlin 
Marcus, Roy Lee. Lillie Ilortense, and Willie Belle Kubanks, under the follow- 
ing i)rovision of the act of Congress approved June 28, 1898 (30 Stats., 495) : 

" Said commission shall have authority to determine the identity of Choctaw 
Indians claiming rights in the Choctaw lands under article fourteen of the 

31362—16 27 



418 INDIAN APPROPEIATION BILL. 

treaty between the United States and the Choctaw Nation, concluded Septem- 
ber twenty-seventh, eighteen hundred and tliirty, and to that end may aihiihi- 
ister oaths, examine witnesses, and perform all other acts necessary thereto, 
and make report to the Secretary of the Interior." 

It also appears that all of said applicants claim rights in the Choctaw lands 
under article 14 of the treaty between the United States and the Choctaw 
Nation, concluded Se]itember 27, 1830, by reason of being descendants of one 
Nellie Bobbins (nee Caffey), who is alleged to have been a Choctaw Indian 
(degree of blood not stated). 

It further appears from the evidence submitted in support of said applica- 
tion, and from the records in the possession of the commission, that none of 
said applicants has ever been enrolled by the Choctaw tribal authorities as a 
member of the Choctaw Tribe, or admitted to Choctaw citizenship by a duly 
constituted court or connnittee of the Choctaw Nation, or by the Commission 
to the Five Civilized Tribes, or by a decree of the United States Court in 
Indian Territory, under the provisions of the act of Congress approved June 
10. 1896 (29 Stats., 321). 

It does not appear from the testimony and evidence offered in support of 
said application or from the records in the possession of the connnission relat- 
ing to persons who complied or attempted to comply with the provisions of said 
Article 14 of the treaty of 1830, and to persons who heretofore were claimants 
thereunder; that the said Nellie Robbins (n^e Caffey) or a less remote ancestor, 
signified (in person or by proxy) to Col. Wm. Ward. Indian Agent. Choctaw 
Agency, an intention to comply with the provisions of said Article 14, or pre- 
sented a claim to rights thereunder to either of the commissions authorized to 
adjudicate such claims bv the acts of Congress approved March 3, 1837 (5 
Stats., 180), and August 23, 1842 (.5 Stats., 513). 

It is therefore the opinion of tliis commission that the evidence herein is 
insufficient to determine the identity of Thomas F. Eubanks, Louisa V. Eubanks, 
Joseph Thomas Eubanks, IMarlin Marcus Eubanks, Roy Lee Eubanks, Lillie 
Hortense Eubanks, and Willie Belle Eubanks as Choctaw Indians entitled to 
rights in the Choctaw lands under the provisions of said Article 14 of the 
treaty of 1830, and that the application for their identification as such should 
be refused, and it is so ordered. 

Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes. 
(Signed) Tams Bixby, 

Acting Chairman. 
(Signed) T. B. Needles. 

Coniniissioner. 
(Signed) C. R. Breckinridge, 



Commissioner. 



Muskogee, Ind. T., November 1, 1902. 



Department of the Interior, 
Office or the Superintendent, Five Civilized Tribes, 

Muskogee, Okla. 
This is to certify that I am the officer having custody of the records pertain- 
ing to the enrollment of the members of the Choctaw, Chickasaw, Cherokee, 
Creek, and Seminole Tribes of Indians, and the disposition of the land of said 
tribes, and that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of testimony 
taken on May 10, 1902, and decision dated November 1, 1902, in the matter of 
the application of Thomas F. Eubanks et al., for their identification as a Missis- 
sippi Choctaw. 

Gabe B. Parker, Superintendent, 
By W. H. Angell, 
Clerk in Charge Choctaiv Records. 
July 22, 1915. 



INDIAJf APPROPRIATION BILL. 



419 



Asher, Okla.; Mississippi Choctatv Indians; field No. R. 5536. 
(Stamped: Refused. Rejected.) 





Relation- 
ship to 
person 

first 
named. 


Age. 


Sex. 


Blood. 


Tribal enrollment of parents. 


Name. 


Name of father. 


Name of mother. 


1. Eubanks, Thomas F. . 




49 

15 

1.3 
8 
6 
4 

1 


M. 

F. 

M. 
M. 
M. 
F. 

F. 


i 

t 


Williim Eubanks 
(dead), noneitizen. 

William Eubanks 
claims Choctaw. 

do 

do 


Elizabeth Eubanks 


2. Eubanks, Louisa V... 

3. Eubanks, Joseph T... 

4. Eubanks, Marlin M... 


Daugh- 
ter. 

Son 

...do 

.do . 


(dead), claims Choc- 
taw. 

Ruthie E. Eubanks 
noneitizen. 

Do. 

Do. 


5. Eubanks, Roy Lee . . . 


do 


Do. 


6. Eubanks, LillieH.... 


Daugh- 
ter. 
...do 


do 


Do. 


7. Eubanks, Willie Belle 


do 


Do. 









Decision rendered November 1, 1902. 

Notice of decision forwarded applicant November 1, 1902. (See testimony. May 10, 1902.) 

Notice of decision mailed attorneys for Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations November 1, 1902. 

Record forwarded department November 17, 1902. 

Decision prepared. 

The application of the several persons herein for identification as Mississippi Choctaws refused in the 
decision in the case of Thomas F. Eubanks, et al., M. I. R. 5536, forwarded the Secretary of the Interior 
November 17, 1902. 

Action approved by Secretary of Interior January 20, 1903. 

Notice of departmental action mailed applicant January 31, 1903. 

Notice of departmental action forwarded attorneys for Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations January 31, 1903. 



CASE NO. 12. 

Statement of P. J. PIitrley, Attorney for the Choctaw Nation, in the 
Matter of the Application for the Enrollment of Bertha Tolber and 
Family as Citizens by Blood of the Choctaw Nation. 



petition of bertha tolber for the enrollment of herself and family as 
choctaw indians by blood. 

Comes now Bertha Tolber and shows, that she is 23 years of age and that 
her present post office is Canadian, Olila. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, 
and by recognition ; that she is the daughter of Elmyra Wimley, nee Wright ; 
that father of the said Elmyra Wimley, n6e Wright, was Leonard Wright, a 
full brother to the ex-Governor Allen Wright, who, petitioner is informed, came 
to the Choctaw Nation west and then returned to the old Choctaw Nation in 
Mississippi and died there ; that her father was Samuel Wimley, a noneitizen. 

That she was born and raised near Colbert, in the Chickasaw Nation ; that 
she has always lived in the Chickasaw and Choctaw Nations. 

That on the 19th day of August, 1909, she was duly and lawfully married 
to James Tolber, and that she has three children too young to be enrolled. 

That (luring all the years of the enrolling period of her said tribe since she 
was born she was a minor; that the roll was closed by operation of law before 
she reached her majority; that although she was long past the age to have been 
enrolled an<l allotted, her name was left off the roll solely for the reason that 
she was a minor and could not look after her own enrollment. 

That her said parents, both of whom are deceased, did not have her enrolled; 
that the Choctaw Nation neglected and refused to have her enrolled ; that the 
Dawes Commission omitted her name from the roll of her said tribe ; that she 
now asks to be restored to the rights due her during her minority that she 
was deprived of by said interested parties for their benefit. 

Wherefore petitioner prays that her name be placed on the approved roll of 
Choctaws by blood and that to her be given her distributive share of the com- 
mon property of the Chootaw tribe of Indians the same as is given to the other 
members thereof. 

Bertha Tolber. 



420 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 

State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

Bertlia Tolber, being first duly sworn, on oath states, that she is the above- 
named Bertlia Tolber ; that she has read over the above and foregoing petition 
and knows the contents thereof, and that the matters and things therein con- 
tained are true. 

Bertha Tolbee. 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this, the 3d day of April, 1915. I further 
certify that I read over the above petition to the affiant and that she knew the 
contents thereof and that she states that same was ftue. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

(My commission expires June 2, 1917.) 



AFFIDAVIT OF HENRY WOODARD IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF BERTHA TOLBERT FOK 
THE ENROLLMENT OF HERSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Henry Woodard. being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 48 years of 
age and that he lives at Eufaula. 

That he is well and personally acquainted with the applicant, Bertha Tolbert. 

That he has known her and her family since 1905 ; that he lived 1 mile from 
them and knows that they had three children, but does not know the names of 
the said children. 

That after they moved from the first place that I knew them, which was 5 
miles south from Atoka, they moved to Sulphur Springs, which was 2 miles 
farther from me. 

That after that they moved to South Canadian, where they have since lived. 

That they were recognized Choctaw Indians and paid no permits and lived 
the same as other Choctaw Indians at that time in that neighborhood. 

I didn't know who were their ancestors as they were never questioned as 
Choctaws and nothing was ever asked about it. 

I knew from information where they came from when they came to near 
Atoka ; it was from Willis place on Red River, which was south of Colbert. 

During all the time that I have known them they were all recognized and 
lived the same as other Choctaw citizens and was never questioned as to their 
rights. 

Henry Woodard (his thumb print). 

State of Oklahoma, Aluskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and swoi-n to before me this the 2nd day of April, 1915 ; I further 
certify that I read over the above affidavit to the affiant and that he knew the 
contents thereof and that he stated that same was true and that he was the 
identical person named therein as afiiant. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

(My commission expires June 2, 1917.) 



affidavit of dan KNOBLIN in SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF BERTHA TOLBERT FOR 
THE ENROLLMENT OF HERSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW' INDIANS. 

Dan Knoblin, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 57 years of age 
and that he lives at Eufaula, Okla. 

That he is well and personally acquainted with the applicant. Bertha Tolbert ; 
that he has known her since 1895 ; that they lived in the house and on the same 
place with me for 2 years; that her mother lived with her at that time; that 
lier name was Elmyra Wimley. 

That I know from information from the parties that were acquainted that 
the said Elmyra Windey died last year, 1914. 

Afliant further states that the petitioner has three children ; their names are 
Edna May, Narcis, and Roosevelt Tolbert ; that they wei-e living a few days 
since when I saw them. 

That the time that I knew them they lived 5 miles south of Atoka. That 
when they left there they moved to Canadian, where they have since lived. 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 421 

That they were recognized Choctaw Indians and had no permits to pay. 

I know this because if they liad not been recognized Clioctaws I would have 
had to pay permits for them as they worked on the farm for me. 

I am not related to the applicants and not interested in any way in the 
determination of this case. 

Dan Knoblin. 

State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 2nd day of April, 1915 ; I further 
certify that I read over the above affidavit to the affiant and that he knew the 
contents thereof and that he stated that same was true and that he was the 
identical person named therein as affiant. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 



(My commission expires June 2, 1917.) 



Notary Public. 



supplemental PKOOF in case heretofore submitted by WEBSTER BALLINGEB. 

The original Choctaw by blood, case No. 12, name of claimant, Bertha 
Tolbert, has heretofore been submitted under the heading of the second sup- 
plemental list of Choctaws by blood. The affidavit of Alee Nail In support of 
the petition of Bertha Tolber is hereto attached and contains additional proof 
as to the right of the claimant in said case. It is respectfully requested that 
this paper be attached to and made a part of the case of the same number 
hereto filed and be considered in connection therewith. 



AFFIDAVIT OF ALEC NAIL IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF BERTHA TOLBER FOR 
ENROLLMENT AS A CHOCTAW INDIAN BY BLOOD 

Alec Nail, being first duly sworn on oath states; that he is 72 years of 
age and that he lives at 1006 South Third Street, Muskogee, Okla. 

That he knows the applicant and that he was well and personally acquainted 
with the Wrights, who were always said to be and recognized as full blood 
Choctaw Indians and whom she claims as her ancestors. 

That the names of the older ones of the boys were Loenard, Alfred and Jack 
Wright; I don't know how many sisters there were but one of them married 
a Wimley, whom the applicant claims as her mother. 

The above named Wrights were all brothers and were related in some way 
with Allen Wright, who was at one time the Governor of the Choctaw Nation. 

All of the Wrights above named and many others all lived south from 
Atoka and down on the mouth of Blue River and they were all recognized, 
Choctaw Indians. 

Affiant further states that the said mother of the applicant Elmyre Wimley 
lived, prior to her death, at what is now Tuska, Okla. That the same place 
used to be called Peck. I don't know just how many children the said Elmyre 
Wimley had, but I do know that there was a bunch of them, 7 or S anyway. 
Some of them died and they have scattered and some of them now live in 
Muskogee. 

This family were all considered and recognized as Choctaws and lived and 
worked around in the neighborhood. 

Alec. Nail (his thumb print). 
State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss : 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 24th day of June, 1915; I 
further certify that I read over and fully explained the above affidavit to the 
affiant and that'he knew the contents thereof and that he stated tliat same 
was true and that he was the ideuical person named therein as affiant. 

Julius Golden, 

Notary PuUic. 

(My commission expires June 2, 1917.) 



422 indiajst appeopeiation bill. 

STATEMENT OF P. J. HURLEY, ATTORNEY FOR THE CHOCTAW NATION. 

In re application of Bertlia Tolber for enrollment of herself and familj' as 
citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

The petition of the applicant in the foregoing case was served upon me by 
Mr. Webster Ballinger, an attorney at law, of Washington, D. C. 

The applicant in this case claims that she was a minor at the time the 
rolls of citizenship of the Choctaw Nation were being prepared by the United 
States Government and that this accounts for the fact that she did not make 
application for enrollment within the time required by law. 

The Supplemental Agreement between the Choctaw-Chickasaw Nations and 
the United States approved by act of Congress, July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. L., 641), 
provides in part as follows : 

" * * * The application of no person whomsoever for enrollment shall be 
received after the expiration of said ninety days." 

This law would now be a legal bar to the enrollment of the applicant. She 
does not state specifically that she was a resident of the Choctaw Nation on 
the 28th day of June, 1898. The Atoka Agreement between the Choctaw- 
Chickasaw Nations and the United States, approved on that date, contains the 
following provision : 

" No person shall be enrolled who has not heretofore removed to and in 
good faith settled in the Nation in which he claims citizenship." (32 Stat, 594.) 

Mrs. Tolber is not now a resident of the Choctaw Nation. She gives as her 
reason for not having made application that she was a minor, yet, an examin- 
ation of the records of the Indian Office at Muskogee discloses that her parents 
did not make application for themselves or their children. 

Mrs. Tolber states that her mother's name was Elmyra Wimley, and that 
Elmyra Wimley was the daughter of Leonard W^right, and that Leonard Wright 
was a full brother of Allen Wright, who was at one time principal chief of the 
Choctaw Nation. 

Upon receipt of this application I immediately forwarded a copy thereof to 
Judge Allen Wright, of the firm of Wright & Boyd, attorneys at law at Mc- 
Alester, Okla. Allen Wright is the son of the Allen Wright referred to as 
principal chief of the Choctaw Nation. Before statehood. Judge Allen W^right 
served as United States commissioner. He is one of the most prominent 
la\^Ters in the Choctaw Nation and a gentleman of high attainments and 
splendid character. 

After Judge Wright had read the petition of Bertha Tolber and the affidavits 
in support thereof, and on the 23d day of July, 1915, he addressed a letter to 
me — the original of which is as follows: 

McAlester, Okla., July 23, 1915. 
Mr. P. J. Hurley, 

National Attorney, CJioctaiv Nation, 

Tulsa, Okla. 

Dear Hurley : Your favor of the 21st, inclosing copy of petition in a citizen- 
ship case, which was filed and served upon you by Webster Ballinger, of 
Washington, D. C, received and the contents of the petition considered with 
a great deal of interest. The petition is the first information that I ever had 
that my father had a brother named Leonard Wright. The fact of the matter 
is that such an allegation is a fabrication pure and simple. My father, when 
about 8 years old, came to the Choctaw Nation from Mississippi, being accom- 
panied by an older sister, his only living relative. Subsequent to coming to 
this country his sister died, leaving two children. Robinson Telle and Alington 
Telle, whom my father took into his family and raised. Robinson Telle died 
the year after he graduated from college and Alington Telle died in March, 
1903, leaving a widow and son, who now live at Atoka. The son, Russell Telle, 
is the only blood relative on my father's side now living in Oklahoma. 

There are plenty of living witnesses who know that my father had no such 
relative as Leonard Wright and, in fact, that he never had any brothers. 

If you desire it I will probably be able to give you the names of persons 
who can substantiate what I have herein stated. 

It is very startling to know to what length these applicants will go in order 
to be enrolled. In this case they have certainly overstepped and it will not be 
at all difficult to show that their claim is pure fabrication. 
With kindest personal regards, I am 

Yours, very truly, Allen Wright. 



INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 423 

Tills letter would seem to be conclusive to the fact that the Leonard Wright, 
brother of Allen Wright, chief of the Choctaw Nation, from whom tliis appli- 
cant claims to be descended, did not exist. 

The applicant is not an Indian — she is a negro. I ascertained tlie place of 
residence of this applicant and at one time liad her located, but it seems that 
her liusband, Jim Tolber, who is a negro, was engaged in construction worlc on 
the M., K. & T. Kailroad and has moved from the addi'ess given. I was unable 
thereafter to locate her, but there is attached liereto a note from tlie post- 
master at Canadian, Okla. He states that he knows the applicant and that 
she is colored. 

The affidavits of witnesses were submitted by Mr. Ballinger and his asso- 
ciates to corroborate the false statements contained in the application of 
Bertha Tolber. Two of these witnesses we were unable to locate. One of 
the witnesses, however, was Alec Nail, an old negro who was used by I\Ir. 
Ballinger and his associates as a professional witness in many of these cases. 

On the 31st day of July, 1915, the testimony of Alec Nail in this case was • 
takeji before William L. Bowie, who is deputy clerk for the United States 
Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma and is engaged as a special in- 
vestigator in the office of the Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes at 
JIuskogee. 

In reference to this case Alec Nail testified as follows : 

" Q. Do you recall a woman who claimed to be a descendant of the Wright 
family of Choctaws? — A. I recall a woman that claimed to be a daughter of old 
Leonard Wright. 

" Q. Had you ever seen this woman before you met her in Mr. Ballingei''s 
office? — A. Never did. 

" Q. Wlio was Leonard Wright? — A. Well, he was a Choctaw. I was not 
acquainted with him like I was with Alford and the old governor. 

" Q. How do you know he was a brother of the old governor? — A. He was 
said to be. 

" Q. Was he a brother of old Gov. Wright? — A. Yes, sir; Allen Wright's father 
at McAlester. 

"Were they full bloods? — A. Yes, sir; old Gov. Wright was a full blood. 

" Q. What would you say if you were told that Allen Wright did not have a 
brother? — A. Well, I would just have to take it, because I don't know; he was 
said to be Alford Wright's brother, but I am not certain about it. 

" Q. I am talking about Allen Wright, who was at one time governor of the 
Choctaw Nation. — A. Yes, sir; I understand. 

" Q. Were you personally acquainted with this Leonard Wright? — A. No, sir; 
I don't know him. 

" Q. Would you know him if you would see him? — A. No, sir; Allen Wright 
and the old governor I know. 

" Q. How many brothers did Allen Wright have? — A. I don't know that. 

" Q. Did you know any of them? — A. Alford was his brother; they say 
he is 

" Q. Do you know Alford? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. He was a brother of Gov. Wright? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Where did Alford live?— A. About 12 miles below Caddo. 

" Q. Was he a full brother? — A. I don't know about that. 

" Q. You did not know him or any of them? — A. No, sir; if an Indian is a 
cousin they claim them to be brothers. 

" Q. Was this woman who claimed to be a daughter of Leonard Wright a 
negro? — A. Yes, sir; she was yellow. 

"Q. She was yellow? — A. Yes. sir. I told them to send that (indicating 
papers in this case filed by Ballinger) to McAlester, but they wouldn't do it. 
Three Texas witnesses were there to that. 

" Q. You say they had three Texas negroes to witness there? — A. They had 
two, I will say that. Bill McCombs brought them up here. 

"Q. Bill McCombs brought them here? — A. Yes, sir. 

" Q. Did you make an affidavit for this woman?— A. Only for the Wright 
family. I never saw the woman until that day. 

"Q. Did you know Jack Wright?— A. Yes, sir; I don't think he was kin to 
the other Wrights. 

"Q. What direction did Jack Wright live from Atoka?— A. Southwest, I 
think. 



424 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

" Q. How far? — A. I think about 7 or 8 miles. 

•• y. Was tie an Indian, a white man, or aarKey? — A. He was a full blood. 

" Q. Did he have any sisters? — A. I don't know. 

" Q. Did he have a sister who married a Wimley? — A. I never heard that 
name before that I know of. 

" Q. Could yon be mistaken about Jack Wright and Alford Wright being 
brothers? — A. Sure; I don't remember ever saying that. 

" Q. You could be mistaken about them being brothers of former Gov. Allen 
Wright? — A. Yes, sir; I don't know. 

•' Q. Do you remember a woman by the name of Elmyra Wimley? — A. I 
don"t believe I do." 

The allidavit purporting to have been signed by you before Julius Golden, 
a notarv public, on June 24. 1915, filed by Mr. Webster P,allinger with the 
petition' of Bertha Tolber for the enrollment of herself and family as citizens 
bv blood of the Choctaw Nation, is as follows: 

" "Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 72 years of age, 
and that he lives at lOOG South Third Street Muskogee, Okla. 

"That he knows the applicant and that he was well and personally acquainted 
with the Wrights, who were always said to be and recognized as full-blood 
Choctaw Indians, and who she claims as her ancestors. 

" That the names of the older ones of the boys were I>eonard. Alfred, and 
Jack Wright. I don't know how many sisters there were, but one of them 
married a Wimley, whom the applicant claims as her mother. 

" The above-named Wrights were all brothers, and were related in some 
way with Allen Wright, who was at one time the governor of the Choctaw 
Nation. 

"All of the Wrights above named and many others all lived south from 
Atoka and down on the mouth of Blue River, and they were all recognized 
Choctaw Indians. 

"Affiant further states that .the said mother of the applicant, Elmyra Wimley, 
lived, prior to her death, at what is now Tuska, Okla. That the same place 
used to be called Peck. I don't know just how maiiy children the said Elmyra 
AVimley had, but I do know that there was a bunch of them — seven or eight, 
anyway. Some of them died and they have scattered, and some of them now 
live in Muskogee. 

"This family were all considered and recognized as Choctaws and lived and 
worked around the neighborhood. 

"(Signed) Alec Nail (by thumb mark)." 

This testimony indicates that this ignorant old negro was made to swear to 
false statements to corroborate the false statements contained in the petition 
of the applicant. It also indicates clearly that the i)urported facts sworn to 
by Alee Nail were not within his knowledge. 

Then we must conclude — 

First. That the applicant is not an Indian — that she is a negro. 

Second. That she did not make application within the time required by law. 

Thii-d. That the facts statetl in her petition are false. 

Fourth. That the affidavits submitted in support of the petition are false. 

In view of these facts we consider it unnecessary to pursue the investigation 
further with a view to locating the applicant and the other witnesses. 

P. J. Hurley, 
National Altorncij for the Choctaio Nation. 



Department of the Interior, 
United States Indian Service, Five Civilized Tribes, 

Mmko(/ee, Okla., Novemhcr 3, 1915. 
Postmaster, 

Canadian, Okla. 
Sir: Desiring to personally interview Bertha Tolber. age given as 23, said to 
be the wife of one James Tolber, in an official matter. I would thank you to 
promptly inform me, by indorsement hereon and under cover of the inclosed 
envelope, whether she resides within the delivery of your office, and, if so, 
whether in town or at what distance and in what direction in the country. 
If she does not reside within your delivery, any information you may furnish 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 425 

with respect to present post-otTice address and nearest town or railway station 
will be appreciated. ^ 

Verj' respectfully, 

Wm. L. Bowie, 
Of Special Investigation Service, 
Office of Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes. 

Bertha Tolber lives 4* miles northeast of here, near Wirth. I understand 
she gets her mail at Eufaula. 

Is this person white, Indian, or colored? Colored. 

I have been told that .Jim Tolber works at the new M. K. & T. works on the 
Canadian River, near home on what is called the Island. I do not know these 
people personally. 

J. D. TiGNOR, Postmaster. 



PETITION NO. 13. 

Statement of P. J. Hukley, Attorney for the Choctaw Nation, in ke Peti- 
tion OF JURDEAN SmYERS FOR ENROLLMENT OF HeRSELF AND FAMILY AS CITI- 
ZENS BY Blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

PETITION of JORDEANA SMYRES, N^E GIVENS, FOR THE ENROLLMENT OF HERSELF AND 
FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Comes now Jurdean Smyres, nee Givens, and shows that she is 38 years of 
fige and that she lives at Gatesville, Okla. 

That she is a Choctaw Indian by birth, by blood, by descent, by residence, 
and by recognition ; that she is the daughter of Adaline Pusley, and that the 
said Adeline Pusley was the daughter of Ellen Pusley, a full-blood Choctaw 
Indian, who lived and died in the Choctaw Nation. 

That the father of applicant was Ed Givins, who was a half-blood Choctaw 
Indian, who died when she was small. 

That applicant was born and raised about 7 or 8 miles southeast from 
Durant, and that she lived there until she moved to Hartshorne, Okla., where 
she was duly and lawfully married to Aaron Smiles; that there was born to 
this union the following-named children, to wit : Haiiey Smyres, age 20 years ; 
Arthur Smyres, age 18 years; Xenia Smyres, age 16 years; Coy Smyres, age 
15 years ; Adeline Smyres, age 14 years ; Jesse Smyres, age 13 years. 

That all the above-named children were born and raised in the Choctaw Na- 
tion and lived there until about 6 years ago, when I brought them to the Creek 
Nation, where they still live at the above-stated place of residence. 

Petitioner further shows that she was left an orphan and married a State 
man and had no one to help her oi- look after her enrollment, and she never 
knew how to help lierself and never made any application. That she lived on 
tlie public domain all her life with her parents until she moved to Hartshorne, 
and then she moved in town and had to rent a house. 

That she and her said family have always been recognized as Choctaw 
Indians and lived with the Choctaws as members of the tribe. That she has 
done the very best she could to be enrolled — that is, the best she knew how 
to do. 

Wherefore petitioner prays that her name, .Turdean Smires, and the names 
of her said children, Harley, Arthur, Zenia, Coy, Adeline, and Jesse Smyres, 
be placed on the approved roll of Choctaw Indians by blood, and that to them 
and to each of them be given their distributive share of the common property 
of the Choctaw Tribe of Indians the .same as is given to all other such citizens 
so enrolled. 

Jukdean Smyees. 

State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

.Turdean Smyres, n6e Givins, being first duly sworn, on oath states that she 
is the above-named Jurdean Givins; that she has read over the above petition 
and knows the contents tliercof, and tliat tiio matters and things therein con- 
tained are true. 

Jubdean Smyres. 



426 INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 

Subscribed and sworn to before nie this the 13th day of April, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over to tlie affiant the above petition, and that she 
knew the contents tliereof and tliat she stated that same was true. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Ptihlic. 

(My connnission expires June 2, 1917.) 



AFFIDxVVIT OF MARY BOSS IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF JURDEAN SMYERS FOR 
THE ENROLLMENT OF HERSELF AND CHILDREN AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Mary Ross, being first duly sworn, on oath states that slie is 29 years of age 
and that she lives in Haskell, Okla. 

That she is well and personally acquainted with the applicant and that she 
has known her for about five years. 

That she also knows her children ; that her baby boy is just one year younger 
than the youngest child of the applicant and that they go to school together ; 
she also has a girl a year older, Adeline, that goes to school with the said boys, 
and the older ones are not going to school. 

She has six children altogether and they all live with her and their father. 

That she only knows who were the ancestors of the applicant from hearsay, 
but that she is informed they were Choctaw Indians. 

Mary Ross. 
State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this, the 13th day of April, 1915. I fur- 
ther certify that I read over the above affidavit to the affiant and that she knew 
the contents thereof and that she stated that same was true and that she was 
the identical person named therein as affiant. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

(My commission expires June 2, 1917.) 



affidavit of W. M. JAMES IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF JURDEA SMYERS FOR 
THE ENROLLMENT OF HERSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

W. M. .Tames, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 70 years of 
age, and that he lives at Beeland, Okla. 

That he first became acquainted with the applicant about 15 years ago; at 
this time she was living with her husband on Blue River about 8 miles from 
Durant ; that they only had two children when he first knew her ; her husband 
was named Aaron Smyers. 

That he was not personally acquainted with the mother of the applicant, 
but that he knew about her ; her name was Pusley and she was said to be a 
full-blood Choctaw. 

That he did know her father ; his name was Ed Givins. I don't know how 
much Choctaw blood he was ; he was just considered a Choctaw Indian the 
same as the other Choctaw Indians that lived there in that part of the country. 

That he knows that she now lives at Catesville and that she has lived there 
for several years; that he has seen her children, but does not know them per- 
sonally. 

W. M. James (his thumb print). 

State of Oklahoma, Mvakogee Connty, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 13th day of April, 1915. I fur- 
ther certify that I read over the above attidavit to the attiant and that he knew 
the contents thereof and that he stated that same was true and that he was 
the identical person named therein as affiant. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

(My commission expires .Tunc 2, 1917.) 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 427 

AFFIDAVIT OF ALEC NAIL IN SUPPORT OF THE PETITION OF JUDEAN SMYRES FOR 
THE ENROLLMENT OF HERSELF AND FAMILY AS CHOCTAW INDIANS. 

Alec Nail, being first duly sworn, on oath states, that he is 72 years of age, 
and that he now lives at 1206 South Third Street, IMuskogee, Okla. 

That he has recently become acquainted with the applicant, but that he knows 
the persons that she states is her ancestors ; that he was well and personally 
acquainted with her said grandmotlier, Ellen Pusley, who was a full-blood 
Choctaw Indian. That she had two brothers, McAlester Pusley and Old Jack 
Pusley that were allotted as he has been informed ; that he was well and per- 
sonally acquainted with the daughter of Ellen Pusley named Adeline, but that 
he does not know who she married and never had heard until he met the 
applicant ; that he did not know the father of the applicant nor does he know 
her family. 

Alec Nail (his thumb print). 
State of Oklahoma, Mitskogee County, ss: 

Subscribed and sworn to be fore me this the 13th day of April, 1915 ; I fur- 
ther certify that I read over the above affidavit to the affiant and that he knew 
the contents thereof and that he stated that the same was true, and that he was 
the identical person named therein as affiant. 

[seal.] Julius Golden, 

Notary Public. 

(My commission expires June 2, 1917.) 



Department of the Interior, 
United States Indian Service, Five Civilized Tribes, 

Muskogee, Okla., November 8, 1915. 
Postmaster, Porter, Okla. 

Sir: Desiring to personally interview Jurdena Smyres, (nee Givens), age 
given as 38, said to be the wife of Aaron Smyres or Smiles, and to have for- 
merly received mail at Gatesville, Okla^ in an official matter, I would thank 
you to promptly inform me, by indorsement hereon and under cover of the 
inclosed envelope, whether she resides within the delivery of your office, and, 
if so, whether in town or at what distance and in what direction in the country. 
If she does not reside within your delivei'y, any information you may furnish 
with respect to present post-office address and nearest town or railway station 
will be appreciated. 

Very respectfully, 

Wm. L. Bowie, 
Of Special Investigation Service, 
Offlce of Superintendent for the Five Civilized Tribes. 



November 9, 1915. 
Jurdena Smyres, post office. Porter, Okla., R. F. D. No. 3, Box 51 ; lives near 
Gatesville, Okla. 

Is this person white, Indian or colored? Colored. 

Emjiett II. Howard. 
Postmaster, Porter, Okla. 



statement of p. j. hurley, attorney for the ciiootaw nation. 

In re petition of Jurdeau Smyers for enrollment of herself and family as citi- 
zens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. 

The foregoing petition, and accompanying affidavits, was served upon me 
by Mr. Webster Ballingcr, an attorney at law of Washington, D. C. 

In this petition Jurdo.ni Smyers makes .'ipplication for enrollment of herself 
and her children as citizens by blood of the Choctaw Nation. We have been 
unable to locate the petitioner, in order to procure her testimony. She does 
not reside at the address given by her in the petition. In fact we find in a 
number of the petitions filed by Mr. Ballinger that the true addresses of the 
applicants are not given. With the statements contained in the petition and 
the affidavits attached thereto, and the testimony of the two persons whose 
affidavits are attached to the petition, we have sufficient evidence to identify 
the applicant, and to show that the claims made by her for enrollment of 



428 INDIAN APPEOPKIATION BILL. 

herself and the members of her family as citizens by blood of the Choctaw 
Nation are fraudulent. Before beginning a discussion of the facts, let me 
first call the attention of the committee to the law. 

First. Upon the face of the petition it is shown that neither the chief ap- 
plicant nor her family resides in the Choctaw Nation. According to the peti- 
tion they reside in Clarksville, a small town located in the Arkansas River 
Bottom in the Creek Nation near Muskogee. The chief applicant admits upon 
the face of her i)etition that she did not make application for enrollment of 
herself or the members of her family during the period in which the rolls of 
citizenship were being made. Section 34 of the supplemental agreement be- 
tween the Choctaw and Chickasaw people and the United States is as follows : 

"During the ninety days first following the date of the final ratification of 
this agreement, the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes may receive appli- 
cations for enrollment only of persons whose names are on the tribal rolls, but 
who have not heretofore been enrolled by said commission, commonly known 
as "delinquents," and such intermarried white persons as may have married 
recognized citizens of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations in accordance with 
the tribal laws, customs and usages on or before the date of the passage of 
this act by Congress, and such infant children as may have been born to 
recognized and enrolled citizens on or before the date of the final ratification 
of this agreement; but the application of no person whomsoever for enrollment 
shall be received after the expiration of the said ninety days: Provided, That 
nothing in this section shall apply to any person or persons making applica- 
tion for enrollment as Mississippi Choctaws, for whom provision has herein 
otherwise been made." (32 Stat. L. 641.) 

Under this law the petitioner would, of course, be barred, as no application 
was filed within the required time. The Commission to the Five Civilized 
Tribes and the Dawes Commission had been receiving applications for enroll- 
ment of citizens in the Choctaw and Chicksaw Nations from June 10, 1896, 
up until 90 days after the passage of the act of July 1, 1902, which is 
quoted above, so that ample time was given to all resident applicants to file 
their petitions. It appears that these applicants were not residents of the 
Choctaw Nation on the 2Sth day of June, 1S9S. The act of Congress approved 
on that date embodied what is commonly known as the Atoka agreement be- 
tween the United States and the Choctaw and Chickasaw people. That agree- 
ment provided: "No person shall be enrolled who has not heretofore removed 
to and in good faith settled in the Nation in which he claims citizenship:" 
(30 Stat L 491), a proviso following this provision to the effect that this pro- 
vision should not be construed to militate against whatever rights and privi- 
leges the Mississippi Choctaws had under treaties with the United States. 
These applicants are not and do not claim to be Mississippi Choctaws; conse- 
quently they would not be entitled to enrollment in the Choctaw Nation even 
if they had made application during the time in which the rolls were being 
made. These applicants are barred on two legal grounds. First, they did 
not make application within the time required by law, and second, they were 
not residents of the Choctaw Nation on June 28, 1898. 

We will now discuss the facts. The chief applicant in this case states thift 
the reason that application was not made for her and her children for en- 
rollment as citizens of the Choctaw Nation during the time that the rolls were 
being made is that she was an orphan. She does not state whether or not her 
children were orphans at that time, and we assume that her husband was 
living. We do not care to dispute Mrs. Smyers's statement to the effect that 
she was an orphan at the time the rolls were being made, but, according to 
her sworn statement, she is the mother of a child who was 20 years of age 
at the time she made the foregoing application. This child would have been 
8 years of age at the time Imitation on filing application was placed in the 
act of 1902. Ai)plicati<)ns for children born after the passage of the act of 
July 1, 1902, could be filed up to and including July 25, 1906. The rolls were 
not finally closed until March 4, 1907. According to the sworn statement of 
Mrs. Smyers she was tlie mother of six children in 1907, the youngest of whom 
was six years of age. No application was made for any of these chil- 
dren during the time the rolls were being made. Under these circumstances 
the plea of Mrs. Smyers was left an orphan would not seem to be entitled to 
great consideration as an excuse for the fact that she made no application for 
enrollment during the period which her application could have been received 
and considered. She may have been an orphan, but she most certainly was 
not a minor. She had reached her majority before the closing of the rolls, 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 429 

and was the mother of a family. She comes now, eight years after the clos- 
ing of the rolls, with the statement that she and her family were recognized 
members of the Choctaw Tribe. She offers no proof except her own assertion 
and the affidavits of two of the professional witnesses usually used by Mr. Bal- 
linger and his associates in enrollment matters. These witnesses are Alec 
Nail, a negro who signs by mark, and W. M. James, a negro who signs by 
.mark. Alec Nail's affidavit in support of the plaintiff's petition in this case 
is as follows : 

"Alec Nail, being first duly sworn on oath, states that he is 72 years of age, 
and that he now lives at 1206 S. 3d St., Muskogee, Okla. 

"That he has recently become acquainted with the applicant, and that he 
knows the persons that she states is her ancestors ; 

"That he was well and personally acquainted with her said grandmother, 
Ellen Pusley, who was a full-blood Choctaw Indian. That she had two 
brothers, McAlester Pusley and Old Jack Pusley, that were allotted, as he has 
been informed ; 

"That he was well and personally acquainted with the daughter of Ellen 
Pulsey named Adeline, but that he does not know who she married, and never 
had heard until he met the applicant. 

"That he did not know the father of the applicant nor does he know her 
family. 

"Alec Nail (his thumb print). 
"State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss. 

"Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 13th day of April, 1915 ; I 
further certify that I read over the above affidavit to the affiant and that he 
knew the contents thereof and that he stated that the same was true and that 
he was the identical person named therein as afBaut. 

"[SEAL.] Julius Golden, Notary Puhlic. 

"My commission expires June 2, 1917." 

At Muskogee, Okla., on July 31, 1915, Alec Nail, after having been first duly 
sworn by Mr. William L. Bowie, deputy clerk of the United States court for 
the Eastern District of Oklahoma, on oath testified as follows: 

"Q. Do you remember a person named Jordeana Smyers, nee Givens? — 
A. No sir, I don't remember her. 

" Q. In the affidavit filed with the application for the enrollment of this per- 
son, made by you on April 13, 1915, you state that you were acquainted with 
the applicant and that you knew the persons whom she stated wei-e her ances- 
tors, and with her grandmother, Ellen Pusley, a full-blood Choctaw. Do you 
remember Ellen Pusley? — A. I remember the Pusleys, they were Choctaw In- 
dians ; I don't remember though the woman who made that application. 

" Q. Do you remember the brothers of Ellen Pusley ? — A. Three of them, I do. 
" Q. What wei-e their names? — A. George, Billy, and Josh. 
"Q. Who was Jack Pusley? — A. I don't know. 
" Q. You do not remember? — A. No, sir. 
" Q. Who was McAlester Pusley ? — A. I don't remember. 
"Q. Do you remember Adaline Pusley? — A. No, sir; I just know Ellen and 
Elmyra." 

This affidavit is very carefully drawn. The affiant does not allege that he 
knows that this negro woman is in any manner related to Choctaw Indians by 
the name of Pusley. He is made to swear in the affidavit, however, that he 
knew two brothers and a sister of Ellen Pusley, who is alleged to be the grand- 
mother of the applicant, but when he attempts, in his testimony, to give the 
names of the brothers of Ellen Pusley he gives them an entirely new set of 
names, and swears positively that he does not know the persons whom he 
swears in his affidavit that he is well and personally acquainted with. The 
other professional witness used by Mr. Ballinger and his associates in citizen- 
ship matters, in his affidavit, positively identifies the applicant. This witness 
is W. M. James. His aflidavit is as follows: 

" W. M. James, being first duly sworn, on oath states that he is 70 years of 
age and that he lives at Beeland, Okla. 

"That he first became acquainted with the applicant about 15 years ago; at 
this time she was living with her Jiusband on Blue River, about 8 miles from 
Durant ; that they only had two children when he first knew her ; her husband 
was named Aaron Smyers. 

"That he was not personally acquainted with the mother of the applicant, 
but that he knew about her ; her name was Pusley and she was said to be a 
full-blood Choctaw. 



430 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

" That he did know her father ; his name was Ed Givins ; I don't know how 
much Choctaw blood he was ; he was just considered a Choctaw Indian, the 
same as the other Clioctaw Indians that lived there in that part of the country. 

" That he knows that she now lives at Gatesville and that she has lived there 
for several years ; that he has seen her children, but does not know them per- 
sonally. 

" W. M. James (his thumb print). 

" State of Oklahoma, Muskogee County, ss: 

" Subscribed and sworn to before me this the 13th day of April, 1915. I 
further certify that I read over the above affidavit to the affiant and that he 
knew the contents thereof and that he stated that same was true and that he 
was the identical person named therein as affiant. 

" [seal.] "Julius Golden, Notary Public. 

" (My commission expires June 2, 1917." 

A full and complete copy of the evidence rendered by him in this case at 
Muskogee, Okla., on July 30, 1915, before an officer of the Interior Department, 
is attached hereto and marked Exhibit A. I will quote herein some of the 
testimony in order to give an idea of the reliability to be placed in affidavits 
filed by Mr. Ballinger in support of petitions. This witness is a keen criminal. 
At the time he rendered this testimony he was confined in the county jail at 
Muskogee. He is at the present time serving a term in the State penitentiary. 
The witness first testified that the applicant herein was a Creek freedman, and 
was a man and not a ^\•oman, and that the father of the applicant was named 
John Smyers. It finally dawned upon him that the applicant was a woman 
instead of a man and he changed his testimony accordingly. He then stated 
that the applicant was a woman and lived in the Little Deep Fork country in 
the Creek Nation, and was half Creek Indian and half negro. It may be seen 
from the affidavit that the witness swore, in support of the petition, that he had 
known the applicant 15 years ago when she was living with her husband 8 
miles from Durant. He then proceeds to show that her mother was a full- 
blood Choctaw, and that her father was Ed Givens, but when asked the ques- 
tion : " When did she live at Durant? " he answered : " I do not know when she 
lived there." 

"Q. What direction did she live from Durant? — A. I don't know. 

"Q. When was the last time you saw her? — A. I haven't seen her for 4 or 5 
years until she came here." 

Again, in the same testimony : 

"Q. How do you know that she is one-half blood Choctaw Indian? — A. She 
said she was. 

"Q. She told you?— A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. That is all you know about it? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. You don't know her father or mother? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. You never knew her brothers or sisters? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. The first time you ever saw her was at Wewoka? — A. Yes, sir; that was 
the first time. 

"Q. Never saw her anywhere else outside of Wewoka? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Not until she came here? — A. No, sir; I never knew what became of her 
until she came here. 

"Q. Do you know where Blue River is? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. Where is it? — A. In the Choctaw Nation. 

"Q. Where? — A. About 7 or 8 miles below Caddo; no, sir; Blue River is be- 
tween Caddo and Atoka. 

"Q. Did that woman ever live on Blue River? — A. Not that I know of. 

"Q. Have you ever been on Blue River? — A. Yes, sir. 

"Q. For some time? — A. Yes, sir : several times. 

"Q. Did that woman have a husband that you know of on Blue River? — A. 
No, sir. 

"Q. Do yon know anything about her children? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Did you ever know a man by the name of Aaron Smyers? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. You do not know whether Aaron Smyers is her husband? — A. No. sir. 

"Q. Do you know whether this woman's mother's name was Pusley? — A. I 
don't know that. 

"Q. Do you know whether her father's name was Ed Givens? — A. No, sir. 

"Q. Did you ever know an Ed Givens, a Choctaw? — A. No, sir. * * *" 

The affidavit which is quoted above was then read to the witness and the 
question was asked: 



INDIAIST APPBOPEIATIOX BILL. 431 

"Q. What do you kuow about this affidavit? — A. I don't remember making 
that. I don't know about it. 

"Q. Does this affidavit refresh j^our memory any? — A. No, sir; not a bit; it 
is a fraud." 

P. J. Hurley, 
National Attorney for the Choctaw Nation. 



Exhibit A. 

Department of the Interior, 
Office of Superintendent Five Civilized Tribes. 

Muskogee, Olcla., July 30, 1915. 

In the matter of the enrollment of various persons as citizens of the Choctaw 
Nation. 

W. M. JAMES, being first duly sworn by William L. Bowie, deputy clerk 
of the United States Court for the Eastern District of Oklahoma, on oath 
testifies as follows: 

Examination by William L. Bowie on behalf of the superintendent for 
the five civilized tribes : 

Q. What is your name? — A. William James. 

Q. Have you any middle initial? — A. William AI. James. 

Q. You sign your name W. M. James? — A. W. M. James. 

Q. What is your age? — A. I was born in 1846. 

Q. Are you a citizen of any of the nations?— A. No, sir; I was born and 
raised in Kentucky. 

Q. You are not enrolled as a freedman, then? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Where did you say you were born — A. In Kentucky. 

Q. What county? — A. Washington County; Springfield is the county seat. 

Q. How far did you live from Springfield? — A. Three miles north. 

Q. How long did you live there? — A. Until I was 20 years old. 

Q. Then where did you go William? — A. I went from there to Louisville and 
worked on a boat from Louisville to New Orleans. 

Q. How long did you run on the boat? — A. I run on the boat during '67, '68, 
and part of '69. 

Q. Then where did you go from there? — A. Came out here. 

Q. From there to Muskogee? — A. To Indian Territory. 

Q. Where did you live in the Indian Territory? — A. I stopped around Fort 
Gibson. 

Q. How long did you stay there? — A. I got work in tlie survey gang for 
the Katy in '70 and worked on the road to Denison, Tex. 

Q. How long did you work with the survey party? — A. I worked with it 
until they got through and then helped them to grade into Parsons. 

Q. How long were you in Parsons? — A. I didn't stay there over 3 or 4 days. 

Q. Where did you go then? — A. I worked on the railroad until it was com- 
pleted. I drove a supply wagon. 

Q. From Parsons down to Denison? — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. Where did you next settle down? — A. I stopped in Denison in '72. they 
completed the road in '72, and I stoppefl in Denison until July, '7.^. 

Q. Where did you go next? — A. Came back to Muskogee. It was just started 
to build. 

Q. And have you resided here continuously ever since? — A. Ever since; I 
have not been out of town for years. 

Q. Have you not been out of town? — A. No, sir; not 20 miles away. 

Q. You have not been 20 miles away from Muskogee? — A. No, sir; to stay 
any length of time since 1873. * * * 

Q. Are you acquainted with Jurdean Smyers? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Who is this person? — A. Supposed to be a Creek freedman. 

Q. Man or woman? — A. A man — Ihe one I know. 

Q. Where does he live? — A. Used to live southwest of Okmulgee. 

Q. How far? — A. Used to live out between Wewoka and Springfield. 

Q. You say this person was a Creek freedman? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Eni'olk'd? — A. No; he was enrolled. 

Q. Do you know whether this person was enrolled? — A. No, sir; if he wag he 
would not be making application. 



432 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Q. When did you first get acquainted with this person? — A. I got acquainted 
with his people in 1883. 

Q. Who was his father? — A. John Smyers. 

Q. Who was his mother? — A. I don't linow now; I can't remember now. 

Q. Did you ever Ijnow a woman by the name of Jurdean Smyers? — A. I can't 
get that name. ^ 

Q. Well, did you know any other person * * *? — A. I knew a woman by 
the name of Julius IMyers. 

Q. Where does she live? — A. She used to live on Little Deep Fork. 

Q. Where is Little Deep Fork, what county? — A. In Okmulgee County. 

Q. Is she an Indian? — A. Well, she is one-half blood; used to live at Coweta. 

Q. What nation now? — A. Creek. 

Q. What is the other half?— A. Colored. 

Q. Negro? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Did you know the parents of this person? — A. Yes, sir; Geo. Myers is her 
vincle. 

Q. Do you know a Choctaw Indian by the name of Jurdean Smyers? — A. Yes, 
sir ; used to be woman that lived at Wewoka. 

Q. This Smyers? — A. That is the same woman. 

Q. Did she have a Creek man? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Ever live at Durant? — A. She said she did; yes, sir. 

Q. Did you ever live at Durant? — A. I worked there some years ago, but she 
used to live at Wewoka. 

Q. She lived at Wewoka? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where does she live now? — A. I don't know, sir. 

Q. When did she live at Durant? — A. I don't know when she lived there. 

Q. What direction did she live from Durant? — A. I don't know. 

Q. When was the last time you saw her? — A, I hav'nt seen her for four or five 
years until she came here. 

Q. Came where? — A. Here in town. 

Q. When did you see her here? — A. On the streets. 

Q. Did you identify her in this office downstairs? — A. Yes, sir; I identified 
her ; Alec Nail showed her to me. 

Q. Alec Nail showed her to you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Is that the first time you had ever seen her? — A. For a good while. 

Y. Where had you seen her before that? — A. Wewoka. 

Q. You saw her in Wewoka? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Wewoka is in the Seminole Nation? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. What were you doing in AVewoka? — A. I used to drive the mail hack. 

Q. What was she doing there? — A. She used to live there, or close to Wewoka. 

Q. She lived close to Wewoka? — A. I'es, sir; right on the line of the Creek 
Nation. 

Q. How far from Wewoka? — A. Lived about 7 miles, north and west. 

Q. Seven miles north and west? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Was she married? — A. She was living with a fellow; I don't know whether 
she was married or not. 

Q. Who was the fellow? — A. Csesar Bowlegs. 

Q. Was she white, Indian, or colored? — A. I don't know; I suppose part 
Indian. 

Q. What part?— A. One-half. 

Q. And of what Indian blood? — A. Choctaw. 

Q. How do you know that she is one-half blood Choctaw Indian? — A. She said 
she was. 

Q. She told you? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. That is all you know about it? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. l"ou don't know her father or mother? — A. No, sir. 

Q. You never knew her brothers or sisters? — A. No, sir. 

Q. The first time you ever saw her was at Wewoka?— A. Yes, sir; that was 
the first time. 

Q. Never saw her anywhere else outside of Wewoka? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Not until she came here? — A. No, sir; I never knew what became of her 
until she came here. 

Q. Do you know where Blue River is? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. Where is it? — A. In the Choctaw Nation. 

Q. Where?— A. About 7 or 8 miles below Caddo — no, sir; Blue River is be- 
tween Caddo and Atoka. 

Q. Did that woman ever live on Blue River? — A. Not that I know of. 



INDIAN APPKOPRIATION BILL. 433 

Q. Have you ever been on Blue River? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. For some time? — A. Yes. sir; several times. 

Q. Did that Avoinan have a hushaiul that jou know of on I>lue River? — A. 
No, sir. 

Q. Do you know anything,' about her children? — A. No. sir. 

Q. Did you ever know a man by the name of Aaron Smyers? — A. No. sir. 

Q. You do not know whc'tlicr Aiu'dii Sniyers is her husband? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Do you know whether tills woman's mother's nnme was Pusley? — A. T 
don't know that. 

Q. Do you know whether her father's name was Ed Givens? — A. No. sir. 

Q. Did you ever know an Ed Givins. a Choctaw? — A. No, sir. 

Q. Where is Gatesville? — A. I don't know exactly. 

Q. You do not know where this place is? — A. I don't know. 

(>. Vou don't know whcthor this woman is living there now or not? — A. 
No. sir. 

Q. Where is Reeland? — A. Eleven and one-half miles southwest of Muskogee. 

Q. Did you ever live there? — A. Yes, sir. 

Q. When dhl you live there? — A. I have lived there ever since 1899. 

Q. Where is your home now? — A. That is my home. 

O. You are an inmate of the county jail now, are you? — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. What crime are you charged with? — A. Check 

Cf. What is the charge against you? — -A. Identifying a check, identification. 

Q. Is the charge for false pretense? — A. Y'es, sir. 

I read you an affidavit piu-porting to have been made by you on A))ril 15. 
191.0. before .Tulius Golden, notary public, filed by INIr. Webster Ballinger with 
the petition of Jnrdean Smyers for the enrollment of herself and family as' 
Choctaw Indians. 

" W. I\I. ,Tamc>s, being first duly sworn, on oath states that be is 70 years of 
age and that he lives at Reeland, Okla. 

"That he first became acquainted with the applicant about 15 years ago; 
nt thi'^ time she was living with her husband on Blue River about 8 miles 
from Durant ; that they only had two children v\'hen he first knt-w her ; her 
huslmnd was named Aaron Smyers. 

" That he was not pei-sonally acquainted with the mother of the applicant, 
but that he know about her; her name was Pusley and she was said to be a 
full blood Choctaw. 

" That he did know her father ; his name was Ed Givens ; I don't know how 
nuii-h Choctaw blood he was ; he was just considered a Choctaw Indian the 
snmc as the other Choctaw Indians that lived there in that part of the country. 

" That he knows that she now lives at Gatesville and that she has lived 
there for several years; that he has seen her children but does not know them 
personally. 

" (Signed) W. M. James, (by thumb mark)." 

i). Whnt do you know about this affidavit? — A. I don't remember making 
that. I don't know about it. 

(). Does tins afiid.'ivit refresh your memory any?— A. No. sir; not a bit; it i^ 
a fniml. 

(>. As a matter of fact. James, did you ever see this woman before Alec Nail 
introduced her to you? — A. I took her to be the same woman. 

(). You took her to be the same woman? — A. Y^es, sir. 

Q. Did you know that she was the same wonuin?— A. She told me she was 
ihe same woman. 

Q. \\ hat did you say her name was — A. Bowlegs at that time. 

Q. You knew her by the name of Bowlegs? — A. Yes. sir. 

Q. You did'nt know her hy the name of Sniyers? — A. No. sir. 

Q. Did not know her by the name of Smyers until Alec Nail introduced 
you? — A. No. sir. 

Q. What was her maiden name? — A. No, sir; I don't know. * * * 

This is not a complete copy of th(> testimony of this witness taken on the 
dnte given, imt is a complete copy of his testimony concerning the applicant 
Jurdean Smy<M-s. 

The CriAiRiMAN. Have yon concluded your statement, Mr. Ballinger ? 
Mr. Ballinger. Yes, sir. 

31362—16 28 



434 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 

Mr. HcRLEY. Mr. Ballinger made one statement highly in his 
favor that is not correct, that is, that no case Avas filed by him on 
which he relied entirely on the corroboration of Alec Nail and 
Wel)Kter Burton. I did not make search of the records for them, 
but I have here a number of cases corroborated only by the affida- 
vits of those two persons. 

Mr. Ballinger. Is not the statement of the claimant there, the 
affidavit of the claimant? 

Mr. Hurley. I beg pardon; you told the committee you did not 
rely entirely on the corroboration by these witnesses in any of the 
cases. 

Mr. Ballinger. I never said so. 

Mr. Hurley. The idea is he has relied entirely on the corroboration 
of those two witnesses in two-thirds of his cases or more, and here are 
the cases. 

The Chairman. You gentlemen will prepare the various records 
you wish, using care not to get into this record something that is of 
a scandalous or impertinent nature. * 

Senator Curtis. I suggest that there be no duplication of this. 
There is no occasion for printing in this record what has already 
been printed in the House record. It is an unnecessary expense, and 
each member of the committee^ I think, has seen the House hearings. 

The Chairman. That photograph is in the House hearings, so do 
not include that in the record, because we have that. 

Mr. Hurley. I have no desire to make any further statement or 
extension of my remarks in the record, except to submit 10 specific 
cases. 

The Chairman. You have been granted permission for that. 

Mr. Ballinger. In order that this may be fair, will not counsel 
furnish me a copy of these things he is putting in the record? 

The Chairman. He is not obliged to, but he probably will. 

Mr. Hurley. I do not want to be unfair to Mr. Ballinger. Mr. 
Ballinger sent these cases to me and requested me to investigate them 
for the purpose of presenting to the committee, and I have his letter 
to that effect. Now his statement about my going before the Secre- 
tary of the Interior and inviting him in, that is all afterthought. 
He asked me to investigate these cases to be prepared to say to this 
committee or to the House committee that we would or would not 
admit to citizenship these applicants. 

Mr. Ballinger. I did not ask you to go secretly, though, and 
present them. 

Mr. Hurley. I do not consider that I am going very secretly. 

Senator Oaven. Might this committee agree to the House pro- 
posals in regard to this per capita distribution ? 

The Chairman. You have heard the motion. 

Senator Page. I should like to ask Senator Owen one or two 
questions for my own information. 

Senator Owen. I shall be glad to answer. 

Senator Page. How much money, Senator, would be taken from 
the Treasury on this particular motion of yours? 

Senator Owen. There would be $300 for the Choctaws and $200 
for the Chickasaws. 

Senator Page. Amounting to how much? 

Senator Owen. Amounting to about how much, Mr. Meritt? 



INDIAN APPEOPKIATION BILL. 435 

Mr. Meritt. a payment of $300 per capita as authorized by the 
Tndian appropriation bill to the 20,799 Choctaw Indians entitled to 
this payment woidd require $6,239,700. The Choctaws have a total 
credit now of $7,888,901.07. To make a $200 ]ier capita payment as 
authorized by the item in the appropriation bill to the 0,304 Chicka- 
saw Indians entitled to this payment would require $1,260,800. The 
Chickasaws have to their credit $2,035,338.47. 

Senator Owex. What is the estimate of the undistributed prop- 
erty? 

Mr. Meritt. They have property estimated from $30,000,000 to 
$50,000,000. 

Senator Curtis. Of the joint property of the two tribes? 

Mr. Meritt. Yes, sir. 

Senator Page. Senator, do you think it is for the good of the Indians 
that we take $7,000,000 or $8,000,000, that I think is substantially 
what it is, and pour it out there in one lump sum to those Indians? 
Do you not think they will be severed from their money in a very short 
time? Would it not be better to give it to them in lesser sums and 
extend it over two or three years ? 

Senator Oavex. I think they are entitled to it from every point of 
view. First, because the treaty which they made was made with the 
express stipulation that it should be paid to them, and that treaty 
was made in 1902, 14 years ago, and one-third of those people have 
died since without getting any money benefits. Now it is true that 
some of these people receiving $300 would in all human prob- 
ability waste some of it, perhaps some of them would waste all of it 
in a large community of that kind, but that would be true also with 
regard to white men to whom you pay a debt. They would use it, 
they might use it unwisely, but that would not justify you not paying 
them what was due them when alive. 

Senator Page. I was talking to some one who was friendly to your 
motion here. Senator, and I asked him what per cent of the Inclians 
were competent to take charge of that fund. As I understand it, it 
means $1,500 to $2,000 to a family, and he said 75 per cent of them: 
he said 50 per cent of them would probably be separated from their 
money within 60 days, I think that was it, and 75 per cent in six 
months. That was his judgment. 

Senator Owen. I think it quite likely they would spend it. That is 
what they want with it. They want to spend it, they want to use it, 
and why should they not use it if it belongs to them ? 

Senator Page. If they are not competent to take charge of it, it 
seems to me better to dole it out to them in smaller quantities. 

Senator Oaven. If you give them $20 at a time they will not be able 
to buy a horse, while if you give them enough to buy a horse or give 
them enough to build a house, they will buy a horse or build a house. 
Do you not supervise those expenditures in some way, Mr. Meritt? 

Mr. Meritt. We supervise the expenditures of the incompetent In- 
di^ns. 

Senator Owen. Does that not answer your question, Senator J ago ( 

Senator Page. Will you j^lease explain then what will be done 
with this money under"' this bill, we pay some $200 and some $300. 
what would be done with this money, would it not be paid over to the 
Indians as they saw fit ? 



436 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

Mr. Meritt. No, sir ; not in that case. May I read the item in order 
to make it clear. It will be found on page .336 of the House hearings. 

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby authorized to pay to 
llic enrolled inenihers of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes of Indians of Olila- 
honia entitled under existing law to share in the funds of said tril)es, or to their 
lawful heirs, out of any moneys belongin.ir to said tribes in the United States 
Treasury or deposited in any bank or held by any othcial under the .iurisdiction 
of the Secretary of the Interior, not to exceed $800 per capita, in the case of the 
Choetaws, and $200 per capita in the case of the Chickasaws, said payment to 
be made under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may 
prescribe: Provided, That in cases where such enr-olled members, or their heirs, 
are Indians who by reason of tlteir degree of Indian l)lood belong to the restricted 
class, the Secretary of tlie Interior may, in his discretion, withhold such payments 
and use tlie same for the benefit of such restricted Indians: Provided further. 
That the money paid to the enrolled members as provided herein shall l)e exempt 
from any lien for attorneys' fees or other debt contracted prior to the passage of 
this act : Provided further. That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby author- 
ized to use not to exceed $8,000 out of the Chickasaw and Choctaw trii)al funds 
for the expenses and the compensation of all necessary employees for the dis- 
tribution of the said per capita payments. 

In other Avords, Ave are paying direct to the competent Indians 
their money under this item, and we will deposit it in the local banks 
to the credit of the incompetent Indians and see that that money 
is used for their benefit. 

Senator Page. What percentage, Mr. Meritt, would you think are 
restricted ? 

Mr. Meritt. I would say that there are probably 30,000 Indians — 
between 30,000 and 35.000' Indians— in the Five Tribes, who are still 
restricted ; about 75,000 enrolled members, including freedmen, have 
had their restrictions removed. 

Senator Page. I did not get the ))ercentage — the pei'centage that 
are restricted of those to whom this fund applies? 

Mr. Meritt. Abotit 25 per cent. 

Senator Page. Seventy -five per cent you would pay over direct? 

]Mi'. Meritt. Yes, sir. 

Senator Gronna. Do you think it would be possible to withhold 
the money from the incompentent Indians after enacting this law? 
Would they not know that their fellow Indians would get this money 
and would they not be liable to ask for the same treatment that 
the others received? 

Mr. Meritt. No, sir; we would not have any difficulty along that 
line. The full-blood Indians, those that are incompetent, would 
have their money deposited to their credit. 

Senator Page. Is not the clamor a great deal stronger on the part 
of the whites who are there and who h()i)e to get this money into 
their possession than on the part of the Indians? 

Senator Owen. I have not heard of any clamor on the part of the 
while.:!. The matter has been pending several years. It was passed 
in the last bill and the bill failed, as you know; therefore there was 
not action taken. It passed both in the House and in the Senate by a 
three-fourths vote, overwhelmingly voting in favor after a discussion 
of the matter very fully. I know no reason in the world why Ave 
shoidd not carry out our agreement Avith these i)eople, especially since 
the inccunpetents are safe-guarded. 

Senator Page. I presume you are right about it. I can not help 
the feeling, however, that here is an action on our part that is going 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 437 

to result in distributing to the whites of Oklahoma some $5,000,000 ; 
that it is so i)atent that in six months your white brothers there who 
want this money will have it. and that a very small part will be with 
the Indians, that I would rather piece it out and give them $50 in- 
stead of $200 and see if at least we could not keep those incompetents 
that are included 

Senator Owex. I could not justify not paying a debt to you for 
fear somebody in your State might get the money. 

The Chairman. Senator Page, in this capital, the most intelligent, 
enlightened city in the country, we have 20,000 people getting a 
salary, and not 1 per cent of the 20,000 saves his salary; there is a 
clamor all the time for an increase in salaries. I have taken pains 
to investigate and certainly there are 20,000 who do not save their 
salaries; then why should we deprive these people of their money? 

Senator Owen. There are two classes provided by the Indian Of- 
fice. Those who are recognized as incompetent are protected by the 
Indian Office. 

Senator Page. Senator, I do not want to pursue this too far, but 
I should like to know if it is not true that a Member of the National 
Congress, I will not say whether he is a Senator or Representative, 
I will leave that so indefinite that you will not have to particularize, 
but is it not true that he has issued a circular giving as one of the 
i-easons why he should be returned to the American Congress the 
fact that he has succeeded in having some $7,000,000 or $8,000,000 
turned out to the whites of Oklahoma ? 

Senator Owen. I am sure I do not know anything of that. It is 
a very extraordinary statement, if he has made it ; it seems to be 
a very surprising plea for him to make, because the only justification 
of this disbursement is a treaty provision in which the Government 
of the United States pledges itself to distribute these funds to these 
particular people, the Government safeguarding the incompetents. 
I think a Member of Congress is entitled to no credit for asking 
the discharge of an obligation by the Federal Government, and to 
make a ])lea that he is entitled to great credit for it is absurd. 

Senator Page. "Would you think a real friend of the Indian, a 
man who had no sort of regard for the Avhites of Oklahoma, that 
a real friend of the Indians of Oklahoma would think it best that 
this treaty provision be carried out by emptying $7,000,000 down 
there among those poor fellows, when it is contended — — 

Senator Owen, lour whole conception is based on the idea that 
you are paying this money out into a rat hole to be divided among 
them; that conception is not justified by the facts. The incompetent 
class is cared for by the Indian Office ; those who are comi)etent have 
just as much right to receive a sum due to them as you have. That 
is all there is about it. 

Senator- Page. I presume as a legal proposition y(ui are right. 

Senator Owen. Not as a legal right; it is a moral right. 

Senator Page. But whether a debt should be paid, if it is a debt, 
and I have no doubt it is 

Senator Owen. One-third of them are already dead. )\'e nuiy 
wait uutil the others die aud give it to their children for some future 
generation, but I shouhl lik'e to see them enjoving some of it while 
they are alive, e\'en if they do not use it wisely I think they might 
be i)ermitted to spend some of it before they die. 



438 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. , 

Senator Page. I do not think they are capable of spending it. 
I think their ^yhite neighbors would spend it. 

Senator Owen. I think that is unjust to them. The Indian, of 
course, is a man who does not care for the acquisition of property 
and does not, as a rule, care for the maintenance of property; his 
ideals do not run in that direction, and for that reason he does 
sometimes spend his money improvidently, and for that reason the 
incompetent class are safely cared for b}^ the Government, and this 
bill provides that the incompetent class shall be protected. 

Senator Page. I can not rid mj'Self of what seems to me a responsi- 
bility in the matter. 

Senator Owen. Of course we should all feel a responsibility in it. 

Senator Page. My feeling of responsibility goes so far that I hesi- 
tate to vote to turn out $7,000,000 where I know that in six months, 
or in a very short time, 75 per cent of it will find its way from 
those 

Senator Owen. Senator Page, a great deal of that nione}^ will be 
invested in young cattle and hogs, and those people will undertake 
to make their living out of it, and they are entitled to undertake to 
make their living out of it. They have got no cattle and no hogs in 
many cases, and I think they ought to be permitted to have that op- 
portunity. 

Senator Page. If I could know where that would be I would have 
no objection. But, as I said before, I took this matter up with one 
friendly to your measure and asked him to give his candid opinion, 
and he said he thought 75 per cent — he made two statements — he said, 
"I think 50 per cent will find its Avay into the hands of the whites 
within either 30 or 60 days, and 75 per cent Avithin 6 months." 

Senator Pittman. If you should give $200 to any white man, any 
intelligent white man who buys clothes and shoes and horses or any- 
thing else, how long do you think he would keep that $200? 

Senator Owen. If yoii give me $200 I will spend it before the 
Aveek is out. 

Senator Page. This goes to families. You give $300 to each mem- 
ber of a family, and there are five or six in a family, there is five 
times 300 or six times 300, which equals $1,500 or $1,800, going to 
one family absolutely incompetent to take care of that fund. 

Senator Owen. You are disregarding the commissioner's care of 
those incompetent Avhich he exercises. 

Senator Page. If it is true that 75 per cent Avill be dissipated 

Senator Oaven. No, Senator, you are ignoring the fact that these 
incompetents are imdcr the supervision of the Indian Office and 
protected. 

Senator Page. I will not take the attention of the committee any 
longer. I am simply going to save my countenance, if I can, by 
A^oting against your motion. Senator. 

Senator Gronna. I Avas going to say just one word. There is a 
great deal of force in Avhat Senator Oavcu says— that the Government 
should fulfill its promises to these Indians. HoweA-er, there are tAvo 
thinirs which Avorry me someAvhat. One is that I do not knoAV 
Avhether these Indians will get the benefit of this per capita payment 
that they ought to get. I was under the impression, and I am under 
the impression now, that some provision ought to be made that a 
certain amount of this money ought to go for school purposes. 



INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL, 439 

Senator Owen, We are conducting the schools out of other funds. 
you know. 

Senator Gronna. I understand tliat; still Congress has to make 
additional provisions for that ^ 

Senator Oaven. For those in certain counties, yes. 

Senator Johnson, I was going to say, Senator, 5^ou would not 
feel if this money belonged to the Indians that we should tell the 
Indians before they got it what they would have to do with, it, would 
you ? 

Senator Gronna, I certainly would tell them what to do Avith it as 
long as they are our wards, as long as we are their guardians, I feel 
that it is our duty to tell them what to do with it, and in every way to 
help them to use it most intelligently. 

Senator Owen. That is done with the incompetent class. 

Senator Johnson, When this property has been distributed will 
there not be a claim against the Government of the Ignited States, 
set up by these Indians who were refused? Will those Indians not 
come to Congress asking for nullions of dollars? 

Senator Owen. The answer to that is that these rolls were ordered 
to be made up in 1896, and the persons were invited to make their 
applications. The Dawes Commission continued that durin«: 1S9T, 
1898, 1899, and for 10 years, and finally the Congress of the United 
States by an act gave a year's warning and closed the rolls March 
4, 1907, after 11 years of controversy; and subsequent to that time, 
on a plea that there were some who Avere overlooked by the inves- 
tigatocs, or who had some equit3^ Ave had a report made from the 
Interior Department, and Ave enrolled 700 — I forget the exact 
number — as being all of those Avho had any equitable claims to 
enrollment. That Avas some A'Cars after. I think probably tAvo 3='ears, 
maybe three, in 1914, probably. 

The Chairman. In Avas in the Indian bill. Senator, 1914. 

Senator Oaven. In the Indian bill of 1914, and that was believed to 
have settled the controversy absolutely. Noav these cases are brought 
np by Mr. Ballinger, and he is urging that these people be enrolled, 
I think the matter is closed and ought to remain closed, and I do 
not think they have any case; I do not think they can establish any 
case. It must be rememliered that the mere fact of a part of Indian, 
blood does not give a legal right, but they must not only be of the 
blood but must have conformed to other conditions; they must haA^e 
lived in the country. The Supreme Court held in the case of the 
Eastern Cherokees, Avho were full-blood Indians, that by long sepa- 
ration they had broken themselves off and could not have the rights 
of citizens in the Cherokee Natitm unless they removed to the Chero- 
kee Nation and Avere admitted in due form. In the case of the other 
five tribes, the Congress of the United States, June '28, 1898, in Avhich 
Avas called the Curtis bill, proxided that unless they had ])revious 
to the date of that bill established residence in good faith tluit they 
Avere barred by that fact. There Avas one exception made to that, 
and that Avas the case of the Mississippi ChoctaAvs; by the treaty 
of 1830 they appeared to have reserved certain rights of citizenship 
coincident Avith li\ing in Mississip]H, and that matter Avent to the 
court, and it Avas held that those Avho had not remoxed would be 
barred by that fact. The case of Jack Amos Avas passed on in the 
Stephens case, Avhich involved many citizenship questions and many 



440 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

citizenship cases. xVftenvards the Choctaws compromised Avith the 
Mississippi Choctaws in 1902 and admitted some 1,(500 of them who 
were full-bk)od Indians and who consented to the conditions imposed 
by Conoress, but that was the final settlement, and the Choctaws in 
that case made a very great concession, in this, that it appeared 
from the evidence of the DaAves Commission report that the Missis- 
sippi Choctaws were unable to prove that their ancestors had com- 
plied with the fourteenth article of the treaty of 1830 in the first 
place, and were unable to prove, in the second place, that they were 
the lineal descendants of such persons, so that on two lines of evi- 
dence, either one of which w^as fatal to them, they were unal)le to 
furnish the evidence necessary. 

The Chocktaws w^aived that requirement in order to give recogni- 
tion to those who were willing to remove to the Choctaw country and 
1,600 did remove and became identified with the Choctaws, and be- 
came citizens of the Choctaw Nation. Some of my own people, my 
aunt for example, who was born in the Cherokee Nation and who is 
part Cherokee, moved into Virginia and lived there. Some of the 
children moved back into the Cherokee Nation and established a resi- 
dence before June 28, 1898. Those of her children who were living 
there previous to June 28, 1898, were enrolled as Cherokee citizens; 
those who did not establish citizenship before that time were denied, 
and I was content with it because it was a reasonable rule that those 
who had separated themselves voluntarily and continued the separa- 
tion from the tribe should not be admitted to exercise the rights of 
citizenship in a community which they had voluntarily separated 
themselves from and had persisted in. So this matter has been thor- 
oughly threshed out and I think there is no danger whatever to the 
United States from any claim made on account of any of these citizen- 
ship matters. Undoubtedly there are some few persons who might 
be able to set up and prove that they were of the Indian blood and 
Avho, perhaps, if they had exercised suflicient diligence, might have 
been enrolled at one time, but even in such cases, under the common 
understanding, there must be some time at which an end shall be 
brought to litigation that we should establish by the decisions when 
the decisions shall have been maintained, and I think the matter was 
patiently gone over. Many of the cases that were before the Dav^res 
Commission came on appeal to the Interior Department and from 
there were sent back and came again to the Interior Department, and 
came from the Interior Department as many as three times, and cer- 
tainly the Congress of the United States has exercised the greatest 
liberality Avith regard to it and the greatest patience. It would open 
I*andora's box to open the rolls of our country, and for that reason 
the legislature of the State has petitioned Congress that it should not 
be done. The Choctaws and Chickasaws and other tribes are unani- 
mous with regard to that, and they are quite right about it because 
it would cause the most serious disturbance to reopen that question. 

The Chairman. Are there any further remarks? 

Senator Clapp. I might say, Senator Owen, that ex-Senator Blair, 
at the last session, I think, at his request, we inserted as a limitation 
against paying these contracts, these words [reading] : 

Except where contracts have hoen heretofore ap])rove(l hy the Secretary of 
the Interior, in accordance witli existin;;' hiw, vvhich contracts tlie Secretary is 
autliorized to settle and discharge. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 441 

Senator Clapp. With this I ask to have inchided the following 
letter: 

(The letter referred to is here printed in full, as follows:) 

Washington, D. C, February 26, 1916. 
Hon. Henry F. Ashurst, 

Chairnia)! Committee on Indian Affairs, 

United States Senate, 

Washington, D. C. 

Sir: We respectfully request that the following aniendnient be added to 
the Indian Appropriation bill on page 34, line 2, after the word " act." 

" Except where contracts have been approved by the Secretary of the In- 
terior in accordance with existing law, which contracts the secretary is 
authorized to settle and discharge." 

The act of April 30, 1908, contains the following provision : 

"That contracts, heretofore or hereafter made liy and between persons 
stricken by the Secretary of the Interior from the final rolls of the Five 
Civilized Tribes, and attorneys employed by them to secure their restoration to 
the rolls, shall be valid and enforceable when approved by the Secretary of the 
Incerior in their original or in such modified form as he may deem equitable 
and not otherwise ; and such contracts as are approved as herein provided, 
when recorded in the county \\here such land is located, shall be a lien in the 
event of the restoration of such persons to the rolls against allotted lands or 
tribal funds of the persons so restored to or given rights upon said rolls." 
(35 Stat., 70; 3 Kappler, 338.) 

We were the atcorneys for certain persons who were unlawfully stricken from 
the rolls by the Secretary of the Interior, and by proceedings in court we 
procured their enrollment and they are now enjoying full rights as members 
of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes. We had contracts witli these persons, 
and on account of the difficulty in collecting our fees we agreed with the then 
Conunissioner of Indian Affairs, Mr. Leupp, that we would reduce them if 
there was a way of insuring their payment, and we agreed witli the depart- 
ment to permit the secretary to fix the fees on the understanding that the 
department would reconunend to Congress that we have a lien on the allot- 
tees' lands and funds for the amount approved by the secretary. 

Congress thereupon passed the above provision, and under it the secretary 
has appi-oved a contract for $750 in favor of former Senator Henry W. Blair, 
of New Hampshire, for securing the enrollment of John Calvin Gray ; one 
in favor of Kappier & IMerillat, James K. Jones, and Charles M. Fechlieimer, of 
Chicasha, Okla., for $400, for securing the enrollment of William T. Lancaster; 
one in favor of Charles M. Fechheimer, of Chicasha, Okla., and Eugene 
Hanulton for $400, for securing the enroUment of Arthur Jennings, and one in 
favor of ('harles i\I. Fechheimer, of (Jhicasha, Okla., and Eugene Hamilton, 
for $400, for securing the iMirollment of Clyde Jennings. 

We hardly think tliat ic is the intention of Congress, in view of the legisla- 
tion of 1908, and the action of the department in approving our liens, now to 
I'ass an act invalidating our li(>ns. We have acted in perfect good faich in 
this matter and have waited since 1908 for our money, and ludess the pro- 
vision on page 34 of the bill as amended as pi-oposed above, we are afraid an 
injustice will l)e done to us. 

We may add that practically \ho same amendment was submitt<Hl to your 
cf)nmiittee last session; that llu' Indian Ollice reported favorably thereon, as 
will be seen by consulting the hearings of last year, page 309; and your com- 
mit (>e adopted the iimendnKMit, and we understand the anuMidment was agreed 
to Jn conl'i'i-cnce. but the Indian aiM»i"opriation bill fiiilcd of ])assage. 

Trusting that this amen<liiH'iit will be favorably acted upon, we are. 
Yours respectfiilly, 

Henry W. Bt.air. 

CiTAKLKS J. KaI'IM.KR. 

Chas. H. Mkriu.at. 
Jajif.s K. Jo.Nics. 

Senator C'l.\pp. Now, Senator Blair is sick at home and could not 
be here. 

Senator Owen. That refers to just a few cases. I have no objec- 
tion to that. 



442 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

The Chairman. That was agreed to hist year? 

Senator Owen. Yes. 

Senator Clapp. With your permission I will ask that it be in- 
serted in the pending bill. 

Senator Oavkx. That is agreeable to us. 

The Chairman. Are there any further remarks? 

Senators Curtis. The limitation was put in the Curtis Act of 
1898 because of the fact that Congress had in treating with the Five 
Tribes authorized them to enact laws in reference to citizenship. 
They have passed laws to the effect that people who voluntarily left 
their territory and became citizens or residents of the States were 
not entitled to enrollment, and in preparing the bill I discovered a 
number of years had been given the Indians to return, and so to 
cai-ry out that law I fixed the period they should be there upon the 
l^assage of the law, June 28, 1898. I just say that so the committee 
may know why the limitation was put into the act. 

Senator Owen. It has been justified by the history of it. 

Senator Curtis. There is no question about that. But there is 
one thing that W'Orries me in this case somewhat. I do not think 
we have the right to raise the question on about 60 per cent or 75 
per cent of these Indians that was raised by Senator Gronna. If 
he will remember, about 60 or 75 per cent of the Indians have been 
removed from the jurisdiction of Congress; that is, they have been 
made citizens and they are no longer the wards of the Government. 
There are only about 30 per cent now" under restrictions, and in 
dealing with that 30 per cent it seems to me that the amendment 
would take care of them; that is, it authorizes the commissioner to 
handle the money for the benefit of the incompetent of the 30 per 
cent. But in looking over this case and studying it years ago, I 
find some 2,700 applications filed that were not acted on by the 
department. I think of those cases only 10 families were of the 
Mississippi Choctaws and the others w^ere applicants who claimed 
rights as being members of the Choctaw a'nd Chickasaw Tribes. 
Those cases were not acted upon; Congress a couple of years ago, 
so I am informed, during my involuntary absence for two years, in- 
vestigated this case and enrolled some of them. I have always 
thought the rights of the 2.722 Indians should be investigated thor- 
oughly and completely, either by the Department or b)^ Congress, 
because they were not left off by any act of their own, and because 
no member of the department, I think, could be criticised because 
Congress limited the time, and Congress thought it had given them 
all the time that was necessary. The question now is, is there 
enough money here to take care of these people should Congress in 
the future conclude to enroll them. I believe in view^ of the fact 
that the tribes have some thirty-odd million dollars of tribal funds, 
there is sufficient funds to satisfy any rights they may have, and for 
the reasons given vei-y briefly by me, I shall vote for this amendment. 

Senator Lane. I think the point ought to be well considered; we 
ought to be well satisfied. If there are others who are justlv entitled 
to a portion of this money 3'ou ai-e diminishing the amount. 

Senator Curtis. No; there is plenty to pa}^ them. 

Senator Lane. No difference if they take 

Senator Curtis. If they were enrolled. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 443 

Senator LA^'E. Then you will have to have separate legislation for 
them. Why can it not be provided for in here, to deduct out the pro- 
portionate amount they Avould be entitled to, and then go ahead and 
make the appropriation? 

Senator Cuktis. There is plenty of money left. There will be 
$30,000,000. 

Senator La>'e. There would not be any if that were to go the same 
way. 

Senator Cuutis. There would be $30,000,000 left they could be paid 
out of. 

Senator Lane. If they keep on getting it, as in this case, there will 
be nothing, and there w^ill be less left than there was if you spend a 
portion of it. That puts it right back tp what I said in the begin- 
ning, that the funds ought to be projiortioned. 

Senator Curtis. They would be given their proportionate shares? 

Senator Lane. They would have less leverage here and less oppor- 
tunity than if it goes in now^ 

Senator Curtis. I think not, with $30,000,000 undisposed of prop- 
erty. 

Senator Lane. Why not deduct that amount, whether it repre- 
sents 1,000 or 1,200 Indians, and then pay the balance to these others, 
and then when you pay again keep on doing the same thing. 

Senator Owen. The commissioner has just stated there is between 
$20,000,000 and $30,000,000. 

Senator Lane. You might have $250,000,000, and if you paid out 
one-half there would be that much less left to divide up. 

Senator Owen. The pro-rata share has a fixed value, so that what 
you say would not really affect the interests of these persons if there 
were any, if they should be hereinafter enrolled. 

Senator Lane. There are certain numbers of them, I think it has 
been pretty generally conceded, who have a right on the roll, who 
have not been able to establish it for one reason or another. Now 
if the number could be estimated and deducted from this amount, 
say, if you appropriate $7,000,000, take out what would cover the 
share of these others, and let them have the rest, you would have 
that much more left when they come in here with a claim, when they 
go into court and make the Government pay the money. 

Senator Curtis. There is no danger of that because the courts have 
decided that Congress has the final word in this matter, and Congress 
having fixed the date for the closing of the rolls and left them off, 
so far as the courts are concerned they would hold these people have 
lost their rights. The only question is wdiether or not Congress will 
in the future act upon their cases. 

Senator Owen. The matter is entirely and exclusively in the hands 
of Congress? 

Senator Curtis. Yes; the matter is entirely and exclusively in the 
hands of Congress, the courts so held that there was no question 
about that. But there is another side to this case that we ought to 
state now before the record is closed. A good many people say the 
folks now there had not a fair chance. They were given many years, 
and I want to say that Congress was influenced to close these rolls 
as it did because of the character of the testimony filed in the en- 
rollment cases. We discovered on inxestigation that they had forged 



444 INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 

seals, that men justices of the peace who were supposed to liave 
sworn persons whose names were signed to the documents had been 
dead 10 or 15 3'ears before the oath was taken before them, and we 
discovered that the records Avere filed for the enrollment of people, 
especiall.y the Chickasaws and Choctaws, and those rolls Avere placed 
in buildings, and the buildings burned, so that Congress and the 
officials could not inquire into the truthfulness of those affidaA'its and 
run them down. And it was, in view of all this, that Congress did 
fix at least a date to close these rolls to stop this kind of conduct. 
I think it is only fair to the Congress and to the members of the com- 
mission who looked into the cases that the statement be made. 

The Chairman. But, Senator, the rolls Avere not closed summa- 
rily. A year elapsed after the act passed until the rolls were closed? 

Senator Curtis. They Avere given plenty of time, it seems to me. 
The time Avas extended' from time to time. The only question is as 
to these men Avho filed their claims. Because of the time it took to get 
reports from Oklahoma up here the de])artment did not have time 
to act on those 2,000 and some applicati(ms — I think they invoh^e 
about 6.000 names all told. I have ahvays thought that those people 
Avho filed their applications in time should have a day in court. I 
mean by that they should have a hearing before Congress, or we 
should authorize some one to look into those cases. I ha\"e always be- 
lieved they lost out, not^because of any lack on their part, but be- 
cause tlie department did not haA^e time to act upon those cases, and I 
understand stamped them " disalloAved.'' because they did not have 
time to inspect and look into the applications. 

I also understand — I have not looked at the i-ecord. but it is my 
recollection — that an amendment Avas offered to the Indian appropria- 
tion liill at the session of Congress folloAving the closing of the rolls, 
and folloAving this act of the department, but it Avas stricken out on 
the floor of the Senate on a point of order. I am not sure about 
that. 

Senator Oavex. They did afterwards, I think, actually g(^ into the 
records. 

Senator Gronna. A couple of years ago Ave provided for the 
enrollment of 400 Avho Avere held as having equities by the Depart- 
ment of the Interior, so that seven years after the rolls had been 
closed in 1907, Avhen the department had seven years in AA'hich to go 
through it, they reported that they thought there Avere 400 Avho were 
entitled, equitably, to be enrolled, and Ave did enrcill them by a 
special act. 

Senatoi- Cnrns. Was that after an iuA'estigation of the 2.700 
applications ? 

Senator Oaven. I suppose so, Senator. I do not knoAv, but I sup- 
])Ose that is the case. 

Senator Gronna. May I ask Senator Curtis a question? 

The Chairman. Certainly. 

Senator Gronna. May 1 ask you. Senator Curtis, Avhether the 
statement you made as to the method of setting up ]n'oof — does that 
apply to tiie Mississippi ChoctaAvs? 

Senator Curtis. No, Ave did not discover anything of that kind in 
regard to the Mississippi ChoctaAvs. That matter all came up after- 
Avards, and it Avas handled largely by the officers of the department on 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 445 

the ground in Mississipi^i. Some of them, (juite a number of them, 
came up to Oklahoma and made a showing, but officers were sent to 
Mississippi. What I had reference to was other applicants for en- 
rollment in the Choctaw and Chickasaw country; and for that matter 
in the Cherokee and Creek countr}- there were persons of that kind. 

Senator Owen. I have no d('ul)t they enrolled thousands of people 
who were not entitled to enrollment at all by fraudulent testimony, 
and that is what the Indians are so sore aljout, and that is why they 
liave been so deeply opposed to reopening the rolls, because they 
thought if the rolls were again reopened they would again be sub- 
jected to the same character of false testimony, of which they felt 
they had been the victims before. 

Senator Gronna, I wish to make this statement to the committee. 
]\Iy interest in this matter has really been stimulated, I might say, by 
the eloquent pleas made by the two senators from Mississippi. On 
various occasions I have listened to Senator Williams, and he has 
on every occasion demonstrated that really there is merit, some merit, 
there must be some merit, to the claims of those Mississippi Choctaw^s. 

Senator Curtis. Senator Williams brought this matter to my 
attention when this bill was originally prepared, and it Avas on his 
request that an item was put in protecting the interests of the Missis- 
sippi Choctaws, but I have been looking over the record, and if you 
look over it, you will find that plenty of time was given those Mis- 
sissippi ChoctaAvs, that is in my judgment, and if my recollection 
serves me right when the question was up in Congress they were 
given six months extra time in which to report. I think Senator 
Williams asked for a year, and we compromised on the floor of the 
House on six months. In addition to that the Government appro- 
priated money to aid and assist these people; the Government sent 
the officers down there, put them on the ground, paid all the expenses, 
and appropriated money to pay the expenses of the Mississippi Choc- 
taws to come up to Oklahoma. You must bear in mind they had no 
right unless they did remove to Oklahoma. They must go there and 
go on the land. There are a lot of these people claiming rights Avho 
never atempted to go to Oklahoma. Then again, looking over this 
list, I find there are but 10 families of Mississippi Choctaws that 
were not acted on for want of time. That was the report of the Sec- 
retary of the Interior. 

Senator Gronna. If you will allow me to interpose just there? 

Senator Curtis. Certainl3\ 

Senator Gronna. We do jiot deal with the Indians strictly accord- 
ing to rules of law, do we? 

Senator Curtis. That is true; yes, sir. 

Senator Gronna. Why should iTot an Indian, because he does not 
live on a certain place, if he is of the same blood, why should he not 
have some ecpiity ? 

Senator Curtis. I will tell you. Because in tlie treaty these peo- 
ple, their ancestors, Avere given lai-ge tracts of land in Mississippi, 
much larger in amount than would have been given them in the 
Indian Territory. 

Senator Gronna. I agree* that is a fair answer, but I cannot 
feel 

Senator Curtis. Wait a moment. There was also a further con- 
dition; they were parties to the treaty, a further condition that in 



446 INDIAN APPEOPEIATION BILL. 

order to have rights in Oklahoma, then the Indian Territory, they 
must remove to the Indian Territory; they must settle among their 
brothers in the Indian Territory, and as fast as they came to that 
countr}^ they were given their rights, except, I think, annuity rights, 
which they had waived in the treaty. 

Senator Owen. Yes. 

Senator Curtis. And not only that, but the Chickasaw and Choc- 
taw Tribe of Indians time and again passed resolutions inviting them 
to come, and in some instances I think offered to pay their expenses. 

Senator Owen. They did pay their expenses. 

Senator Curtis. And did everything they could to get them there. 
Then, Senator, this question, has been pending in Congress and was 
agitated for years, and they had time and they did not remove ; and 
I think, in view of the authority Congress gave these tribes, and all 
that was done, that their rights were protected as fully as they could 
have expected them to be protected under the circumstances. I mean 
the Mississippi Choctaws, now. I have taken great interest in the 
Mississippi Choctaws for the same reason that Senator Gronna has, 
namely, because Senator AVilliams from the very first has been a very 
ardent supporter of the rights of those people, and I took an interest 
in it first at his request and have continued to do so, and now if I 
thought a great injustice was done those people I would not vote 
for this amendment, but I believe if they have any rights there will 
be sufficient money left to pay them. 

The Chairman. Is there any further discussion? 

Senator Gronna. If I thought that the Mississippi Choctaws 
know ihe conditions, that this legislation was not made without 
their knowledge, of course I should not oppose it. If they had had 
their day in court, if they understood it, but I will not agree that 
it is a fair proposition to a tribe of Indians, or to a number of In- 
dians I will say, that simply because they did not live in a certain 
particular place, that they were not entitled to property which is 
held by their tribe. 

Senator Curtis. You must remember that they were exempted 
from the act of June l>8, 1898. 

Senator Gronna. That is not the way we are legislating for In- 
dians. 

Senator Curtis. They wore especially exempted and were the 
only branch of any of the tribes that were exempted. They were 
given additional time and after that the agents of the Government 
were sent down tlierc to aid and assist them, and the Government, 
as I said, appropriated money to help move them to Oklahoma. The 
only ones set out were those who had been in Oklahoma or in the 
Indian Territory at some time, and had moved of their own volition. 

The CiiAiRiviAN. Is there any further discussion? If not, the sec- 
retary will call the roll. 

The question being taken by yeas and nays, resulted: 

Yeas five, as follows: Senators Pittman, Owen, Clapp, Cuilis and 
Ashurst. 

Nays two, as follows : Senators Page and Gronna. 

The Chairman. The yeas have it, and the proposal of the House 
is agreed to. 

That finishes Oklahoma. We now have Minnesota. 



INDIAN APPROPRIATION BILL. 447 

RED RIVER AND FLAMliEAU (wiS.) DISPOSITION OF Ti:\rBER. 

Senator Clapp. Before we take up Minnesota, on behalf of Sena- 
tor La Follette, I want to call the committee's attention to the 
amendment to S. 4383 to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to 
dispose of the timber on the so-called lands and swamp lands within 
the Red River and the Flambeau Indian Reservations, which has 
not only been approved by the Department but somewhat earnestly 
urged. 

Senator Curtis. Is that Senator Nelson's amendment? 

Senator Clapp. No, this is for Wisconsin. 

Senator Gronna. Is it in the original bill? 

Senator Clapp. No, sir. 

Senator Gronna. It must have been estimated for since the bill 
came from the House then? 

Mr. Meritt. We have an item found on page 408 of the Hearings 
of the House covering the matter. 

Senator Page. I think I have some knowledge of this, Mr. Chair- 
man. It has been a matter of dispute for a long time as to whether 
these lands belonged to the Indians or to the State, and the time has 
come when they ought to be disposed of, I think, and it is provided 
here that the proceeds be deposited at interest somewhere for safe- 
keeping until the adjustment is reached. I rather think the bill is 
good. 

Senator Curtis. You think the question ought to be settled. Sena- 
tor, on the appropriation bill, do you? 

The Chairman. It is a separate bill, Senator. 

Senator Page. I thought it was on the appropriation bill. 

Senator Curtis. I do not think we settle the question. We simply 
say the lands may be sold and the money kept until the matter is 
adjusted. 

Senator Clapp. Senator La Follette wanted it put on the ajipro- 
priation bill under the Wisconsin item. 

Senator Curtis. Did you not, as a member of the committee, in- 
vestigate that at one time. Senator Page? 

Senator Page. Yes; Senator Clapp and Mr. Brown, Mr. Small 
and myself. I think. Am I right about that, Senator Clapp? 

Senator Clapp. Yes. 

The Chairman. It is in the amendments asked for by the depart- 
ment. Is there any objection to the legislation going on the bill? 

Senator Gronna. I was told the other day there would be a bill in 
the course of a few days before this committee that would take care of 
bills that were purely legislation. I have no objection that I know of 
to this particular provision. It is hardly fair to the rest of us to say 
that simply because the department wants cei-tain things that legis- 
lation must go on, and then some Meml^ers of Congress want to know 
whether there has been any estimate for it or not. Now, whether 
that is a fair way of proceeding, I do not know. 

Senator Ci rtts. I think Senator Gronna is right. 

MISSISSIPPI CIIOCTAWS — ENROLL.^IENT. 

The Chairman. I ask leave to include in the record some corre- 
spondence regarding the per capita payments, being a letter I wrote 



448 INDIAN APPROPPJATION BILL. 

Mr. Bixby, of Muskogee, and his reply, under the head of Choctaw 
and Chickasaw per capita payments. 

(The letter and reply referred to is here pi'inted in full, as fol- 
loAvs : ) 

July 30, 1915. 
Hon. Tam.s IJixhy, 

.Muskogee, OJda. 

My Di:au Sru : Tlie Indian Committee (hu'inji tlie last session of Omgress 
was sul).iecte(l to tlie strenuous contention that the Mississippi ('lioctaws still 
residin.i: in Mississippi were entitled to enrollment under the treaty of 1S30. 

Our records show that the Dawes Conunission reported in January, 1898, 
that the INIississippi Choctaws were unable to prove their descent from ances- 
tors who were supposed to be fourteenth article claimants, and were unable to 
pi-ove that their ancestors had comjilied with the requirements of the foiu*- 
teenth article of the treaty of 1830, and therefore could not qualify themselves 
under the law ; that Cou.s;ress passed an act iNIay 31. 1900, that those " didy iden- 
tified " mi.ii'ht be enrolled for allotment if tlie.v should x'emove to the Choctaw 
country west, but that the Dawes Conunission, upon an inquiry, found that 
very few, indeed, if any, could show thenis(>lves the descendants of foiu'teenth 
article claimants, or that their ancestors had complied with the conditions of the 
fourteenth article, and therefore that the Dawes Commission were unable to 
find more than a very few who could be " duly identified." 

It ap])ears, however, that when the Choctaw-Chiclcasaw a.tcreenient of 1902 
was submitted to Con.2:i*ess, recognizing Mississippi Choctaws who might be 
" duly identified " a strenuous contention was made to change the rules of evi- 
dence so that the full bloods might be recognized as entitled under the four- 
teenth article, without regard to technical proof that their ancestors had com- 
plied with the conditions of the fourteenth article. 

I am informed, after the Interior Department, in February, 1901, changed its 
attitude from a recognition of the schedule of IMarch 10, 1899, and the full- 
blood rule of evidence as submitted by the Dawes Commission, and stood strictly 
ui)on the technical requirements of the law until June, 1902, when a compro- 
mise was effected by which the full-blood rule of evidence was inserted as an 
amendment on the floor of the House of Representatives, recognizing the fuU- 
l>lood rule of evidence, upon an agx'eement between the members of the Indian 
Committee, the attorneys for the Choctaws and Chickasaws, and the representa- 
tives of the Mississijipi Choctaws. 

I should nice a statement from you as to whether or not tliese I'epresenta- 
tions are strictly true and to have from you a statement of what the facts were, 
to the best of your understanding, because this matter will again come up in 
Congress this winter in all human probability, and we should have a plain 
statement fi-om you with regard to this matter. 

I understand that the Dawes Commission oppo.sed admission of the Missis- 
sippi ('hoctaws except where they made the strictest technical proof until the 
c()mi)roniise was entered into fixing the full-blood rule of evidence in the agree- 
ment of July 1, 1902. 

I should appreciate your writing me fully and cleai-ly with regard to this 
matter. 

Yours, respectfully. 

(Signed) Henry F. Ashukst. 



Muskogee, Oki.a.. Se/jteviher 23, Wl-l. 
Hon. Henry F. Ashurst, 

Chairman, Committee on Indian Affaira, 

United States Senate. 
Dear Sui: In answer to your i-equest, under date of July 30, with regard 
to the Mississii)pi Choctaws and their ri.ght to have the Choctaw rolls reopened 
and to be admitted to citizenship, I have the following statement to malce 
relative to the history of this case : 

Under the act of 1896, authorizing the Dawc^s Conunission to make the rolls 
of citizens of the Five Civilized Tril)es. application was made to the commis- 
sion in the case of Jack Amos et al., and in which the question was raised as 
to whether fuU-bkxMl ]\Iississi'")i Choctaws residing in Mississippi had the right 
to be enrolled as Choctaw citizens. 



IXDTAX APPEOPRIATIOX BILL. 449 

The Dawes Counnissiou denied the Jack Ainos case December 1, 1896, and 
it was appealed to Judge W. H. H. Clayton's court and he decided that the 
Dawes Conmiission was correct in its decision in denying Jack Amos et al. 
Judge Claxton gave as his reason for sustaining the r)awes Commission that 
Jack Amos et al. (Mississippi Choctaws residing in IMlssissippi) not having 
removed to the Choctaw country west were not entitled to be enrolled, even 
if they were full-blood Mississippi Choctaws, and that their claim to the right 
to be enrolled while resident in Mississippi could not be sustained. This judg- 
ment against the Mississippi Choctaws was final under the law which made 
Judge Clayton's court final arbiter in matters appealed from the Dawes Com- 
mission. It was recognized that the Jack Amos case was a test case. 

In the Indian appropriation bill which passed in INIarch, 1897, an item was 
inserted directing the Dawes Commission to make a report to Congress on 
the rights of the Mississippi Choctaws. President Cleveland failed to sign 
this act of Congress, but it was reenacted the following June (1897) and 
was signed by the President. Under this direction of Congress the Dawes 
Connnission made its repoi't, which was sent in to Congress in January, 1898, 
in wliich the commission held that the Mississippi Choctaws who were the 
lineal descendants of the fourteenth article claimants under the treaty of 1830 
would be entitled to move to the Choctaw Nation and be enrolled for citizenship, 
provided they were identified by some competent tribunal and should actually 
remove to the Choctaw country west. 

In the Curtis Act of June 28, 1898, Congress instructed the Dawes Com- 
luission to identify the Rlississippi Choctaws who should be entitled to remove 
under this report of the Dawes Commission. 

Maj. A. S. McKennon went to Mississippi during February, 1899, and iden- 
tified 1,923 Mississippi Choctaws, but stated in the report that it was made 
up on the theory that in making the enrollment he thought it only fair to 
regard full-blood Choctaws as the descendants of fourteenth article claimants. 
He stated in this report, substantially, that no proper record had ever been 
made in 1830 of the fourteenth ai'ticle claimants ; that the IMississippi Choc- 
taws in 1899 could not prove, first, that their ancestors had complied with the 
fourteenth article, and, second, could not prove their lineal descent from their 
ancestors of 1830 as they had no family records. 

While the Dawes Commission joined in this report made by Hon. A. S. 
IMcKennon it was v.'ith some misgiving that the commission was not justified 
in rendering an opinion without competent evidence that would give the 
Mississippi Choctaws property worth millions of dollars in the Choctaw country 
west, and upon a more careful examination into the matter the commission 
concluded that the full-blood rule of evidence, so called, adopted by the report 
of 1899, was not justified as a matter of law and could not be maintained. 

On the 31st of IMay, 1900, Congress passed an act that Mississippi Choctaws 
" duly identified "' by the Dawes Conunissi.n might remove to the Clioctaw 
country west at any time before the rolls closed. 

IMany applications were made under this act for identification. The Dawes 
Commission decided that any person to be " duly identified " must prove that 
his ancestor had complied with the conditions of the fourteenth article of the 
treaty of 1830, and that he was a lineal descendant of such ancestor. 

After examining nearly every case which had been enrolled imder the schedule 
of March 10, 1899, the commission decided that only a very few individuals 
would be entitled to enrollment as "duly identified." Neither the Dawes 
Connnission nor the Interior Department felt that it had a right by loose 
interpretation to permit the Mississippi Choctaws to absorb millions of dollars 
of property vested by law in the Choctaw Nation west imless it were done 
upon tlie direct and express authority of Congress. It did not seem right that 
those who had lived in Mississippi for generation after generation, and who 
had taken no part in developing the Choctaw country west, should have the 
right to joint ownership of this property unless they could prove themselves 
entitled by competent evidence, and this th(>y could not do. For that rea.son 
the Dawes Commission and the Interior Dejiartment were opposed to their 
enrollment and in the report of the Dawes Conmiission of May 19, 1902, the 
reasons of the Dawes Commission were fully set up and were sustained by the 
ii^ecretary of the Interior in his letter of June 2, 1902. 

The Choctaws and Cliickasaws west naturally felt that they were not called 
upon to divide this estate with persons who had not lived with them for over 
70 years and they were opposed to admitting Mississippi Choctaws who could 

31362—16 29 



450 INDIAN APPEOPRIATION BILL. 

not support their claim by adequate and competent evidence, and, for this 
reason, the agreement was presented to Congress February 23, 1901, and also 
March 24, 1902. providing that only Mississippi Choctaws " duly identified " 
should be admitted. 

Those representing Mississippi Choctaws strenuously contended that the full- 
blood rule of evidence should be adopted and that the schedule of March 10, 
1899, should be recognized as binding. This schedule was erroneous in many 
particulars as the Dawes Commission discovi'red upon a critical examination 
of it, but finally, in order to adjust this controversy, a compromise was reached 
when the Choctaw-Chickasaw agreement of 1902 was passed on in Congress so 
that an amendment providing for the full-blood rule of evidence was adopted, 
so drawn, however, as to recognize only those who were living full bloods an(l 
not recognizing their half-breed children. It was thought better by the Gov- 
ernment authorities to yield this point as a settlement of the controversy as 
the friends of the Mississippi Choctaws were demanding very much larger 
concessions. 

I do not think that the rolls should be opened or that those not already on 
the rolls as Mississippi Choctaws should be given any further consideration 
for the simple reason that this contest was pending from 1S96 to March 4, 1907, 
when the rolls were closed by act Of Congress, and it is of great importance to 
the peace of the Choctaws and Chickasaws and of the State of Oklahoma that 
these rolls, which were finally closed by act of Congress eight years ago, should 
not be disturbed on any account whatever. 
Yours, very respectfully, 

Tams Bixby. 

CHIPPEWA INDIANS FOND DU LAC BAND. 

Senator Clapp. I ask leave to report that bill, S. 4G83, giving juris- 
diction to the Court of Claims to the Chippewa Indians of the Fond 
du Lac Band, calendar No. 117. While the Indian Office does not 
think these people have very much of a claim, they are rather in- 
clined to think they might go to the court to settle the question. 

The Chairman. Is there any objection to the Senator reporting 
that bill favorablj^? 

Senator Page. I should like to know more about it, because I do 
not know anything about it. 

Senator Clapp. It relates to the pine that Avas taken off of the 
Fond du Lac Reservation, a small reservation near the head of 
Lake Superior, right out from Duluth, and it is claimed this 
pine was sold by the Government, and consequently the Indians 
should be reimbursed. While the suit is brought by the Fond du 
Lacs under the bill, because it relates to their reservation, the money, 
of course, will go into the general fund of the Chippewas in Minne- 
sota. The Indian Office is not very much impressed with the idea 
that the Indians have a claim here, but they do feel there is enough 
of it anyway to warrant them letting them go to the court and find 
out about it. 

Senator Gronna. Is that all of this bill? 

Senator Page. I should like to hear from the department, if there 
is no objection. 

The Chairman. Have you any objection, Mr. INIeritt? 

Mr. Meritt. We have no objection to the Indians going to the 
Court of Claims on this matter. I have not gone over the wording 
of the bill carefully. 

The Chairman. Is there any objection to the motion? If not, the 
Senator will report it. 



Part Thirteen 



CHOCTAW AND CHICKASAW PER CAPITA PAYMENT 

EXTRACTS FROM SPEECH 

OF 

HON. ROBERT L. OWEN 

OF OKLAHOMA 

IN THE 

SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 
MARCH 27, 1916 



CONTAINING ARGUMENT OF MR. P. J. HURLEY, NATIONAL 
ATTORNEY FOR IHE CHOCTAW NATION 

REPORT OF HON. FRANKLIN K. LANE, SECRETARY 
OF THE .NTERIOiJ, AND 

REPORT OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE COMMITTEE ON 
INDIAN AFFAIRS, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AGAINST 

THE CLAIMS OF THE MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAWS AND OTHERS 

FOR ENROLLMENT AS CITIZENS OF THE CtiOC- 

TAW AND CHICKASAW NATIONS 



^ 



37G]7— 15507 



WASUINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PUINTING OPPIOB 

lUlO 



m 






I 



.#**© Nk5*>^ 



EXTRACTS FROM SPEECH 

OF 

HON. EGBERT L. OWEN". 



Having completed an argument on the floor of the 
Senate against the reopening of tlie Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw rolls and in favor of a provision carried in the Indian 
appropriation bill anthorizing a per capita ])a}T:nent to 
the Choctaws and Chickasaws, Mr. Oaven submitted the 
following : 

]\Ir. OWEN. I wish to put in the Record with regard 
to tlus matter several statements by the attorney for tlie 
Choctaw Nation, which give in brief extracts from 
treaties, citations of decisions of courts and of decisions of 
the different Secretaries of the Interior and reports of 
the present Secretary of the Interior and of the special 
committee of the House of Representatives who examined 
these claims at very great length. Four different Secre- 
taries of the Interior have decided against the claim of 
the Mississippi Choctaws — Republican Secretaries and 
Democratic Secretaries. There is no longer any ground 
whatever, either in law or morals or ethics, why this 
matter should be reopened; nor have the Mississippi 
Choctaws any claim against the United States except the 
claim of a dependent, impoverished people, for whom the 
United States has always shown generous care. They 
have no claim whatever against the property or funds of 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw Indians of Oklahoma. 

There being no objection, the matter referred to was 
ordered to be printed in the Record^ as follows : 

Statement of P. J. Hurley, Nattoxal Attorney for 
THE Choctaw Nation. 

IN RE ENROLmiENT :MATTERS. 

The following is a brief statement outlining generally 
the history and the present status of the claims which are 

37617—15507 3 



now being presented by persons for enrollment as citizens 
of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. 



MISSISSIPPI CHOCTAWS. 



On March 10, 1899, the Dawes Commission reported 
that there Avere extremely few, if an^^, Indians in Mis- 
sissippi who conld prove their right to enrollment as 
citizens of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, under 
the fourteenth article of the treaty of September 27, 
1830. At that time there was much agitation for the 
enrollment of the so-called Mississippi Choctaws, and in 
the agreement between the Choctaws and Chickasaws 
and the United States, approved July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. 
L., 641), a compromise was reached on the Mississippi 
Choctaw claim. 

The Choctaws and Chickasaws agreed to enroll, as a 
gratuity, all full-blood Choctaws who then resided in 
Mississippi if they would remove to and establish a. resi- 
dence in the Choctaw or Chickasaw Nations. 

Under this agreement 1,634 Mississippi Choctaws were 
enrolled and received allotments in the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations. With a few exceptions, the entire 
1,634 were enrolled under the full-blood rule of evi- 
dence and Avere not required to ])rove a right to enroll- 
ment. The approximate value of the property received 
by these 1,634 persons is $15,000,000. This is the price 
paid by the Choc^taw and Chickasaw Nations for a settle- 
ment of the Mississippi Choctavv^ claim in 1902. 

In consideration for this concession on the part of the 
Choctaws and ChickasaAvs the Government agreed to 
close the rolls, to sell the residue of tribal property, and 
distribute the proceeds per capita among the enrolled 
members of the tribes. The United States Government 
has not performed its part of the agreement. 

The agreement of 1902 (32 Stat. L., 641), above re- 
ferred to, contained the folloAving provision : 

" No person Avhose name does not appear upon the 
rolls prepared as herein provided shall be entitled in any 
manner to ])articipate in the distribution of the common 
property of the .ChoctaAV and ChickasaAv Tribes, and 
those Avhose names api:>ear therein shall participate in 
the manner set forth in this agreement." 



37017—15507 



The act of April 26, 1906 (34 Stat. L., 137), declared 
the rolls of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations closed 
in the following language : 

" Provided, That the rolls of the tribes (Choctaw and 
Chickasaw) affected by this act shall be fully completed 
on or before the 4th day of March, 1907, and the Secre- 
tary of the Interior shall have no jurisdiction to approve 
the enrollment of any persons after that date." 

The rolls of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations are 
therefore closed and have been closed since the 4th day 
of March, 1907. 

The claim which is now being presented by the pi'o- 
ponents of the legislation for the enrollment of Missis- 
sippi Choctaws has heretofore been fully considered and 
decided adversely to the so-called ^lississippi Choctaws 
bv the following tribunals and officials: 
"(1) .1897: The Federal courts of Indian Territory. 
(Jack Amos v. Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations. Juris- 
diction affirmed by Supreme Court, Stephens v. Cherokee 
Nation, 174 U. S., 445.) 

(2) 1898: The Dav/es Commission to the Five Civi- 
lized Tribes. (See reports Jan. 28, 1898, and Mar. 10, 
1899.) 

(3) 1902: The Choctaw and Chickasaw people and the 
United States Government in the preparation of the sup- 
plemental agreement of July 1, 1902. (32 Stat. L., 641.) 

(4) 1906: The Congress of the United States, which 
by the act of April 26, 1906, finallv directed the closing 
of the rolls March 4, 1907. (34 Stat. L., 137.) 

(5) 1912: Hon. Samuel Adams, First Assistant Sec- 
retary of the Interior. (See report dated July 2, 1913, 
addressed to Hon. John H. Stephens, chairman Com- 
mittee on Indian Aifairs, House of Representatives.) 

(6) 1915: A. subcommittee of the Committee on Indian 
Affairs of the House of Representatives. (See report 
on H. R. 12586, dated Jan. 2, 1915.) 

(7) 1915: Hon. Franklin K. Lane, Secretary of the 
Interior. (See report dated Jan. 8, 3915, addressed to 
Hon. John H. Stephens, chairman of Ww. Committee 
on Indian Affairs of the House of Representatives.) 

The United States Covernment is bound by solemn 
agreement to sell the residue of Choctaw and Chickasaw 
tribal propert}^ and distribute the proceeds among the 
enrolled memi)ers of the tribes. Fulfillment of this 

37G17— 15507 



obligation has Ijcen, and is l^eing, prevented by the rep- 
I'esentations of the alleged Mississippi Choctaws and 
hy the proponents of legislation intended to be of assist- 
ance to the alleged Mississippi Ohov^taws. 

It has been repeatedly shown that the ]\Iississippi 
( 'hoctaws have no legal, eqnita])le, or moral right to 
share in the property of the Choctaw Nation. 

CLAIlNiANTS FOR CITlZEXSHir OTHEE THAN INriSSTSSim 

CHOCTAWS. 

It has been contendc^d by attorneys and agents rep- 
resenting claimants for enrollment as citizens of the 
niioctaw and Chickasaw Nations that there was a period 
inunediately before the closing of the rolls on March 
4, 1907, during which action on all pending cases was 
rushed, and that the applicants were not given the benefit 
of a cautious consideration of their cases. 

This contention is v6ry misleading, because it is a 
fact that the cases wdiich Avere considered during the so- 
called " rush period " had been considered before^ 
some of them had been considered and determined a 
number of times, and were pending on motion to review^ 
or on appeal from the order denying a motion to review. 
Very few, if any of them, w^ere pending on a direct ap- 
peal from the original decision of the Commission to the 
Five Civilized Tribes, and none of them were p(mding 
for a consideration on the merits of the cases — the merits 
having theretofore been passed upon by the Commission 
to the Five Civilized Tribes. 

All of these matters have been under consideration 
almost continuously since the closing of the rolls March 
4, 1907. At one time the agitation for the reopening of 
the rolls of the Five Civilized Tribes became so great 
that the matter was brought to the attention of the 
President of the ITnited States, and after having fully 
considered the matter. President Taft wrote the follow- 
ing letter to Richard C. Adams, an attorney at law, of 
Washington, D. C. : 

The White House, 
Washington, April 20, 1910. 

My Dear Sir: I am in receipt of your letter w^hich 
you visited my office with Mr. Creager, of Oklahoma, 
to hand me. Your letter deals with the question of 

07017—15507 



claims of Indians against the Government. ,0f course 
I am in favor of facilitating the hearing of those claims 
as much as possible ; and as to the second, I am opposed 
to the reopening of the Indian citizenship rolls. It 
seems to me it would be like opening a Pandora's 
box. Exceptional cases that present great equities 
might be considered by special legislation. 

In conclusion, I can only say that no one is more 
anxious than I am to close out these Indian disputes and 
put Indians on the basis of other citizens, in so far as it 
is possible to do so without exposing those who are un- 
educated and unable to look after their own interests to 
the fraudulent manipulation of unprincipled persons. 
Sincerelv, vours, 

Wm. H. Taft. 

Mr. Richard C. ADA]\rs, 

Bond Building, Washinf/ton, D. C. 

(See H. R. Rept. isTo. 2273, 61st Cong., 3d sess.) 

It will be noted that the President was opposed to the 
reopening of the rolls, but said '' exceptional cases that 
present great equities might be considered by special 
legislation." 

On February 12, 1910, Hon. R. A. Ballinger, then Sec- 
retary of the Interior, addressed a letter to Hon. Moses 
E. Olapp, chairman of the Committee on Indian Affairs 
of the United States Senate, in which he made the follow- 
ing recommendation : 

" In conclusion, I am constrained to believe, and there- 
fore recommend, that the rolls be not opened up, but that 
proper legal authority be given the Secretary of the In- 
terior to place upon the rolls those Indians (about 52 in 
number) whose applications were approved by the Com- 
missioner to the Five Civilized Tribes and were trans- 
mitted to Washington before the 4th of March, 1907, but 
did not reach the department until after the rolls were 
closed; and, furthermore, that proper authority be given 
the Secretary of the Interior to examine and ])lace upon 
the rolls the minor orphan children, incompetents, and 
Indians in incarceration whose claims were not presented 
in due time for adjudication. I am informed that this 
class numbers about 200. No one seems to have taken the 
responsibility of presenting the claims of this class for 

3TG17— mSOT 



8 

consideration. They conld not look after their own inter- 
ests." (See S. Bog. No. 1139, 62d Cong., 3d sess.) 

The Secretary in this letter recommends against the re- 
opening of the rolls, but favors special legislation for the 
j'clief of 52 pc^rsons, whose names were omitted from the 
rolls through inadvertence, and recommends that au- 
thority be gi^'en for the examination of the cases of cer- 
tain other persons, not to exceed 200 in all. 

Both President Taft and Secretary Ballinger, after 
having fully considered the question that is now under 
consideration, both decided against the reopening of the 
rolls. They considered, however, that there were a few 
exceptional cases wherein the applicants had strong 
equities and were in justice entitled to some relief. 

Two investigations were made by the Interior Depart- 
ment to ascertain the names of all persons who were 
legally or equitably entitled to enrollment as citizens of 
the Five Civilized Tribes and whose names were not upon 
the finally approved rolls. 

With the consent and upon the advice of the attorneys 
for the tribes, Hon. Robert L. Owen, a Member of the 
United States Senate from Oklahoma, addressed a letter 
to the Secretar}^ of the Interior asking that he be fur- 
nished with the names of persons who, upon investigation, 
had been found apparently equital)ly entitled to enroll- 
ment. 

On April 24, 1914, Senator Owen received the following 
letter from Hon. A. A. Jones, First Assistant Secretary 
of the Interior: 

Dj-.rARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR, 

Washington, April 24, 1914. 

My Dear Senator: In response to your request of 
April 22, I am inclosing herewith a list of the names of 
persons who, upon the investigation heretofore made, 
have been found apparently equitably entitled to enroll- 
ment on the rolls of the various tribes composing the Five 
Civilized Tribes, of Oklahoma. The data as to each of 
these names have h(^retofore been submitted to the Com- 
mittee on Indian Affairs of the Senate, and may be found 
in Senate Document No. 1139, Sixt^^-second Congress, 
third session. 

This list contains the names of all those whom the de- 
partment has found equitably entitled to enrollment, omit- 

G7G17 — 10507 



ting, as suggested, the names of newborn Choctaw freed- 
men. 

Very trulj^, yours, 

A. A. Jones, 
First Assistant Secretary, 
Hon. Egbert L. Owen, 

United States Senate. 

The list transmitted to Senator Owen with the above 
letter contained the names of 318 persons. The Indian 
appropriation bill which became a law August 1, 1914 
(38 Stat. L., 582), carried a provision authorizing the 
enrollment in the respective tribes of the persons whose 
names appear upon said list. All of said persons have 
since been enrolled and have received their distributive 
share of the property of the tribe to which they belong. 

The letter of Secretary Jones, and the list, are set forth 
in full in Senate Document No. 478, Sixty-third Con- 
gress, third session. 

Inasmuch as it has been repeatedly shown that the 
so-called Mississippi Choctaws have no right to enroll- 
ment, and inasmuch as all those residing in the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations who appear to have been equit- 
ably entitled to enrollment have been enrolled, the mem- 
bers of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes can not under- 
stand w^hy the Government of the United States does not 
comply with tlie terms of its agreement made with them 
in 1902. 

There appears to be no just reason why the residue 
of tril^al property should not be sold and the proceeds 
arising from such sale distributed per capita among the 
enrolled members of the tribes in compliance with the 
terms of the treaty of 1902. 

A considerable amount of tribal property has been sold 
and the money is now on deposit. There have been 
jDartial crop failures in Oklahoma for the past four 
years — in some sections the failure was almost complete. 
There are many Choctaw^s and Chickasaws who have 
been, and are now, in destitute circumstances and are in 
dire need of the money tliat belong to them. The United 
States Government should at once pay tbom the money 
that is now on deposit to their credit. 

For this reason we res]:)ectfully request the enactment 
of the provision now carried in the Indian ap])ro]iriation 

37617—15507 2 



10 

bill, authorizing a distribution of all funds now to the 
credit of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations, as shown 
by memorandum of the Commissioner of Indian Affairs 
transmitted to the Committee on Indian Affairs of the 
House of Representatives on December 15, 1915. Said 
memorandum is in full as follows: 

" The books of the Indian Office show that on Decem- 
ber 15, 1915, there was in the Treasury of the United 
States to the credit of the Choctaw Nation, Okla., the 
sum of $3,360,620.11, and in banks in Oklahoma to the 
credit of said nation the sum of $4,071,733.13, the total 
Choctaw "tribal fund being $7,432,353.24. The books of 
the Indian Office further show that on said date there 
was in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of 
the Chickasaw Nation, Okla., the sum of $778,471.51, and 
in banks in Oklahoma to the credit of said Chickasaw 
Nation the smn of $1,143,638.97, the total Chickasaw, 
tribal fund being $1,922,110.48, the aggregate fund of 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations being $9,354,463.72. 
The deferred payments on the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
tribal lands heretofore sold approximate $6,000,000 and 
the estimated value of the unsold land and other proi3erty 
of said nations approximates $16,149,491.23. Thus the 
total funds and other property of the Choctaw and Chick- 
asaw Nations ax^proximates $31,503,954.95. 

" Twenty thousand seven hundred and ninety-nine en- 
rolled citizens of the Choctaw Nation are entitled to share 
in any per capita distribution of the funds of said nation, 
and 6,304 enrolled citizens of the Chickasaw Nation are 
entitled to share in any per capita distribution of the 
tribal funds of tliat nation. 

'^ For the purpose of further carrying out the Atoka 
agreement with the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes (see 
act of Congress of June 28, 1898, 30 Stat. L.,_ 495, 512, 
513) and the supplemental agreement with said Indian 
tribes adopted by the act of Congress of July 1, 1902 
(32 Stat. L., 641-654), and in view of the general needy 
conditions existing in said nations it is recommended that 
an appropriation be made out of the Choctaw tril^al funds 
for a per capita payment to the enrolled members of the 
Choctaw Tribe or to the heirs of deceased enrolled mem- 
bers, and out of the Choctaw tribal funds iPor a per- 
(;apita payment to the enrolled members of the Chickasaw 
Tribe or to the heirs of deceased enrolled members of 

;i7017- 15507 



11 

said tribe, and that it be i3rovided that such payments 
shall be made under rules and regulations to bo prescribed 
by the Secretary of the Interior, and that in cases where 
the enrolled members of the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations or their heirs are Indians who by reason of their 
degree of Indian blood belong to the restricted class, tlie 
Secretary of the Interior may, in his discretion, with- 
hold such payments and use the same for the benefit of 
such restricted Indians. 

" Inasmuch as a $100 per capita payTiient was made to 
the enrolled members of the Chickasaw Nation under the 
act of August 1, 1914, at which time no pajanent was made 
to the enrolled members of the Choctaw Nation, it is 
therefore reconnnended that the enrolled members of the 
Choctaw Nation should be paid $100 per capita more than 
the amount provided for the enrolled members of the 
Chickasaw Nation. These payments would be made from 
the tribal funds belonging to the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations and would not be a tax on the Federal Treasury." 

P. J. HlTELEY, 

National Attorneij for the Choctaw Nation. 



Washingtox, D. C, Fehruary 3, 1915. 
Hon. ITexey F. Ashurst, 

United States Senate, Washington, D. C. 

My Dear Senator: The Indian appropriation bill, 
which is now being considered by the Committee on 
Indian Affairs of the Senate, contains a provision author- 
izing a per capita i5a}mient of $200 to the enrolled mem- 
bers of the Choctaw Nation and a pa;smient of $100 to the 
enrolled members of the Chickasaw N'^.tion. 

Every member of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tiibes 
is the owner of an equal undivided interest in the tril)al 
propert}' of both tril)es. The Chickasaws received a ]K'r 
capita i^apnent of $100 last year. The Choctaws received 
no payment. The provision now carried in the bill, if 
enacted, will equalize the amount received from ti'ibal 
funds by the Choctaws and Chickasaws. 

I am advised that an effort will be made l)y those who 
espouse the claim of the so-called AIississii)pi Choctaws 
to prevent the enactment of the provision referred to and 
that an attempt will be made to reo|)en the rolls of the 

37017— 1G.J07 



12 

Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations for the enrollment of 
the alleged Mississippi Choctaws. 

T eallyonr attention to the fact that on March .10, 1899, 
the Dawes Connnission reported that there were ex- 
tremely few, if any, Indians in ^lississippi who could 
prove a light to enrollment as citizens of the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations. At that time there was much 
agitation for the enrollment of the so-called Mississippi 
Choctaws, and in the agreement approved July 1, 1902 
(82 Stat. L., 641), hetween the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Nations and the United States a compromise was reached 
on the Mississippi Choctaw claims. 

The Choctaws and Chickasaws agreed to enroll, as a 
gratuity, all full-blood Choctaw Indians who then resided 
in jMississippi if they v/ould remove to the Choctaw or 
Chickasaw Nations. 

Under this agreement 1,634. Mississippi Choctaws were 
enrolled and received allotments in the ChoctaAV and 
Chickasaw Nations. With a few exceptions the entire 
1,684 Avere enrolled under the full-blood rule of evidence 
and were not required to prove a right to enrollment. 
The approximate value of the property received ])y these 
1,634 persons is $15,000,000. This is the price paid by the 
ChoctaAY and Chickasaw Nations for a settlement of the 
Mississippi Choctaw claim in 1902. 

In consideration for this concession on the part of the 
Choctaws and Chickasaws, the Government agreed to 
close the rolls, to sell the residue of tribal property, and 
distribute the proceeds per capita among the enrolled 
members of the tribes. The United States Government 
has not performed its part of the agreement. 

The agreement of 1902, above referred to, contained 
the following provision : 

" No person whose name does not appear upon the 
rolls prepared as herein provided shall be entitled in 
any manner to participate in the distribution of the 
common property of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes, 
and those whose names appear therein shall participate 
in the manner set forth in this agreement." 

The act of April 26, 1906, declared the rolls of the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations closed in the following 
lan*^"ua"'e : 

'^Provided, That the rolls of the tribes (Choctaw and 
Chickasaw) affected by this act shall be fully completed 

;'.7Gi7-]rjr.07 



on or before the 4th day of March, 1907, and the Secre- 
tary of the Interior shall have no jurisdiction to approve 
the enrollment of any person after that date." 

The rolls of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations are 
therefore closed, and have been closed since the 4th day 
of March, 1907. 

The claim which is now being presented b.y the propo- 
lients of the legislation for the enrollment of Mississi])pi 
Choctaws has heretofore been fully considered and de- 
cided adversel.y to the so-called Mississippi Choctaws by 
tlie following tribunals and officials : 

1. 1897: The Federal courts of Indian Territory. 
(Jack Amos v. Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations.' Juris- 
diction affirmed bv Supreme Coui't, Stephens v. Cherokee 
Nation, 174 U. S.j 445.) 

2. 1898: The Dawes Commission to the Five Civilized 
Tribes. (See reports Jan. 28, 1898, and Mar. 10, 1899.) 

o. 1902: The Choctaw and Chickasaw people, and the 
United States Government in the preparation of the sup- 
plemental agreement of July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. I.., 641). 

4. 1906: The Congress of the United States, which by 
the act of April 26, 1906, hnallv directed the closing of 
tlie rolls ]\rarch 4, 1907. 

5. 1912: Hon. Samuel Adams, First Assistant Secre- 
tary of the Interior. (See report of eluly 2, 1912.) 

6. 1915: A subcommittee of the Committee on Indian 
Affairs of the House of Representatives. (Copy of re- 
port attached.) 

7. 1915: Hon. Franklin K. Lane, Secretary of the In- 
terior. (Copy of report dated Jan. 8, 1915, attached.) 

The United States Government is bound b)^ solemn 
agreement to sell the residue of Choctaw and Chickasaw 
tribal property and distribute the proceeds among the 
enrolled members of the tribes. Fulfillment of this obli- 
gation has been and is being prevented by the represen- 
tatives of the alleged ^lississippi Choctaws and by the 
proi^onents of legislation intended to be of assistance to 
the alleged ]\lississippi Choctaws. 

It has been repeatedly shown that the Mississippi 
Choctaws have no legal, equitable, or moi'al i-iglit to share 
in the property of the Choctaw Nation. 

A considerable amount of tri])al propei-ty has been sold 
and the money is now on deposit. There iiave been ])ar- 
tial crop failures in Oklahoma for the past four years — 

37G17— 15507 



14 

in some sections the failure was almost complete. There 
are many Clioctaws and Chickasaws who have been, and 
are now, in destitute ciremnstances and are in dire need 
of the money that belongs to them. The United States 
Govermnent should at once pay them this money in com- 
l^liance with the terms of the agreement of 1902. 

In view of these circumstances we respectfully solicit 

your assistance in preventing the reopening of the rolls 

of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations and in securing 

the enactment of a law authorizing a per capita payment. 

Yours, respectfully, 

P. J. Hurley, 
National Attorney, Choctaw Nation. 



Report of the Secretary of the Interior on the 
Harrison Bill (H. R. 12586). 

The Secretary of the Interior, 

Washington, January 8, 1915. 

My Dear Mr. Stephens: I have the honor to refer 
herein to a communication of August 12, 1914, from Hon. 
C. D. Carter, then acting chairman of the Conmiittee on 
Indian Affairs of the House of Representatives, mth 
which was inclosed a copy of H. R. 12586, entitled "A 
bill to reopen the rolls of the Choctaw-Chickasaw Tribes 
and to provide for the awarding of the rights secured to 
certain persons by the fourteenth article of the treaty of 
Dancing Rabbit Creek, of date September 27, 1830." 
He also referred to H. R. 4536 and requested that I con- 
sider the two bills together and make a report thereon. 

Upon examination of H. R. 4536, I find that said bill 
is identical witli H. R. 19213, introduced by Mr. Harri- 
son of Mississii)pi in the Sixty-second Congress, second 
session, u]:>on which last-mentioned bill the department 
submitted to your committee a report dated July 2, 1912. 
H. R. 12586, introduced in the present Congress by Mr. 
Harrison, is a similar bill to the above-mentioned bills, 
except that in said H. R. 12586 an additional paragraph 
is included in section 2 to provide for the enrollment of 
all persons who were identified as Mississippi Choctaws 
by the Dawes Commission in its report of March 10, 1899, 
commonly known as the McKennon roll, and of all per- 

37017— loSOT 



15 

sons identified as Mississippi Clioctaws bv the Dawes 
Conmiission from Marcli 10, 1899, to March 4, 1907, 
wh-ose identification was approved by the Secretary of 
the Interior but whose names did not appear on the final 
citizenship rolls of the Choctaw and Cliickasaw Nations. 

The claims of Mississipi^i Choctaw Indians to recog- 
nition as citizens of the Choctaw Nation of Oklalioma 
and to share in the property of said nation are based 
upon article 14 of the treaty of September 27, 1830. (7 
Stat. L., 335.) Pursuant to the terms of the treaty, a 
large number of Clioctaws were transferred from Missis- 
sippi to the country west, later known as Indian Terri- 
tory. These Clioctaws who so I'emoved and their descend- 
ants now constitute the main body of what is knoAWi as 
tlie Choctaw Nation. There were, however, a consider- 
able number of Clioctaws who remained behind in Missis- 
sippi, some of them under the provisions of article 14 
above mentioned. 

Said article 14 provided that the person who claimed 
thereunder should not lose the privilege of a Choctaw 
citizen, but if they ever removed were not to be entitled to 
any part of the Choctaw annuity. The Indians who re- 
mained behind under the provisions of said article 14 re- 
ceived either land in MississipiDi or scrip, which gave the 
applicants the right to enter upon public lands in certain 
Southern States. A part of said scrip, however, was later 
commuted by a money paj^nent. Some of the fourteenth- 
article claimants later made their way west and joined 
tlie main body of the trilio in the Indian Territory. The 
(,'hoctaw Council by various acts recognized the right of 
said absentee ^Mississippi Choctaws to remove to the na- 
tion, and actually invited them to do so. 

Under the provisions of the Atoka agreement with the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Tribes contained in the act of 
Congress of June 28, 1898 (30 Stat. L., 495), the supple- 
mental agreement contained in the act of July 1, 1902 (32 
Stat. Ij., 641), and later acts of Congress for the purpose 
of carrying out the provisions of said agreements, the 
claims of individual Mississippi Choctaw Indians to be 
identified and to be enrolled as entitled to share in the 
property of the Choctaw Nation wei'e full>' considered by 
the Commission to tlu' Five Civilized Tribes and by the 
department after full heai'iug, at whicli tli(» clnimants had 
ample opportunity to present all \hv evidence which they 
37017— inso? 



16 

could procure in support of their claims. Very few 
claimants were able to prove descent from an ancestor 
who received or applied for benehts under the provisions 
of article 14 of the treaty of 1830. 

The history of the Dawes Commission enrollment work 
relative to Mississippi Choctaw claimants is very fully 
set out in a communication of April 14, 1914, from AVil- 
liam O. Beall, at one time secretary of the Commission to 
the Five Civilized Tribes. A cop)^ thereof is inclosed for 
your information. 

For 3^our further information as to the history of the 
Mississippi Choctaw claims and of the department action 
in the preparation of the final rolls there is inclosed a 
copy of department letter of July 2, 1912, to the chairman 
of the Committee on Indian Affairs of the House of Rep- 
resentatives. 

Judge William H. H. Clayton in his decision in the case 
of Jack Amos i'. The Choctaw Nation, a coi:)y of which 
may be found in the appendix of the annual report of the 
Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes for the fiscal 
year ended June 30, 1901, said that no treaty or acts of 
the Choctaw Council or of any officer of the Choctaw 
Council since the treaty of 1830 could be cited, or at least 
he had not found them, whereby any right or privilege 
had been conferred, granted, or recognized in or to a 
Mississippi Choctaw so long as he remained away from 
his people, and that no right was recognized or conferred 
upon such absent Indian except upon the condition that 
he should remove to the nation, and the i ight was not to be 
consummated or enjoyed until actual removal. 

Mississippi Choctaw Indians who, while the opportunity 
was theirs under the privileges accorded them, refused to 
emigrate with the tribe to the new country west, and who 
never shared in the burdens and hardships of the pioneer 
life incident to the establishment of the new tribal gov- 
ernment west of the Mississippi, have at this late date 
(now that the tribal property of the Choctaw Nation made 
valuable by the emigrants is being divided per capita 
among the' enrolled recognized citizens of the nation) no 
equitable right to share in said property. 

With respect to the i^ersons who were identified by 
the Dawes Commission as Mississippi Choctaws under 
the provisions of the act of Congress of June 28, 1898 
(30 Stat. L., 495), ])ut who failed to remove and make 

S7017— ir>507 



17 

settlement iu the Choctaw-Chickasaw country, as re- 
quired by the act of (bngress of July 1, 1902 (32 Stat. 
L., 641, sees. 41, 42, 43, and 44), it' may be said that, 
irresj^ective of their unfortunate condition of poverty 
and ignorance there is no ground, legal or equitable, for 
holding the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations res])onsible 
for the failure of said identified persons to comply with 
the law as to removal and settlement. No o])ligation 
rested upon the United States to provide means for tlie 
removal of such Indians. 

Referring to the class of claimants whose names were 
contained in an identification roll submitted by the Com- 
mission to the Five Civilized Tri])cs on March 10, 1S99, 
but never approved by the Secretary of the Interior, 
your attention is invited to the fact that the conmiission 
soon recognized the inaccuracy and incompleteness of 
that roll and requested the deparfment to disregard it 
and to return the same to the commission. In order tha„t 
there might be no doubt as to the standing of said roll, 
it was disapproved by the department in March 1, 1907. 
The larger part of the persons whose names were con- 
tained on that disapproved roll were afterwards placed 
on the approved identification rolls, and those who com- 
plied with the law as to removal and settlement were 
enrolled on the final rolls of Mississippi Choctaw Indians. 

In the investigation and examination of Mississi|)pi 
Choctaw claims made in 1900 and the years following by 
the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes every effort 
that was possible to be made was made bj^ said commis- 
sion to reach all persons who had any equitable claim to 
recognition as Mississippi Clioctaws, and especially to 
find those who were full-blood (^hoctaw Indians. 

II. R. 4536 and 125(S6 in effect provide, so far as tlie 
Mississipi:)! Choctaw claimants are concerned, a general 
reopening of the rolls of the Choctaw Nation, necessitat- 
ing a review of all the cases which had l)een adversely 
decided by the United States courts, tlu^ I)e])artment of 
the Interior, and the Choctaw and Chickasaw citizenshi]) 
court, as well as the consideration of claims not hereto- 
fore presented or considered, and em])ower the Secret;- ry 
of the Interior to determine the rights of the claimants 
upon such evidence as may be i)roduced by the a])]'>U- 
cants, without regard to any adverse judgment or de- 
cision heretofore rendered by any court or commission 

a7G17— 15.j07 



18 

to the Five Civilized Tribes or the Department of the 
Interior, and without regard to any condition or dis- 
ability heretofore imposed by any act of Congress. 

The records of the department show the Mississippi 
Choctaw^ claimants have been to an unusual extent the 
victims of numerous extortionate contracts, and the cor- 
respondence in many cases indicates that contracts were 
obtained through misrepresentations as to the facts, and 
in some cases that such contracts were obtained from 
claimants who believe tliat the persons obtaining the 
contracts were Government agents. Your attention is 
invited to the report of Inspector McLaughlin, of this 
department, which report appears in print in the 
Congressional Record of July 10, 1914, commencing on 
page 13022. 

Referring to section 9 of said bills, I am of the opinion 
that, in view of the large amount of tribal property yet 
to be disposed of and of other matters affecting the 
tribes, it would be advisable to abolish the tribal organi- 
zation of the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations at the 
present time. 

In view of the facts as presented to me, I am of the 
opinion that no legislation should be enacted for the 
reopening of the rolls of the Choctaw Nation for the 
benefit of the Mississippi Choctaw claimants. 
Very truly, yours, 

Franklin K. Lane. 

Hon. John H. Stephens, 

Chairman Committee on Indian Affairs, 

House of Representatives. 



REPORT ON H..R. 125SG. 
I 

January 2, 1915. 
Hon. John H. Stephens, 

Chairman House Committee on Indian Affairs, 

Washington, D. C. 

Sm: Your subcommittee appointed to investigate and 
report on H. R. 12586 begs leave to submit the following 
observations : 

A careful and painstaking investigation of all treaties, 
laws, and other rccords bearing on this claim, including 

37617—15507 



19 

healings lasting from April 1, 1914, nntil August 27, 
1914, was gone into by vonr committee. 
PI. R. 12586 directs: ' 

1. Tlie Secretary of tlie Interior to enroll certain 
Mississippi Choctaws upon the rolls of the Choctaw 
Nation in Oklalioma, with a full participation in their 
tribal estate. 

2. To reopen the Choctaw rolls for the adjudication of 
20,000 or more alleged claimants. 

There are some Choctaws still remaining in Mississippi 
who have persistently refused and successfully resisted 
all efforts of the Federal. Government and the Choctaw 
Nation to have them move west and affiliate with the 
tribe. 

The testimony l)efore the suljcommittee discloses many 
thousands of persons of doubtful descent, African and 
other, living in Mississippi and surrounding States, who 
have attempted to assert claims as ClK^ctaAv Indians. 

Such Indians of real Choctaw blood as still reside in 
Mississippi appear to take little interest in the claims 
asserted by their alleged attorneys. On the other hand, 
those claiming remote Indian blood and of doubtful 
descent have manifested much interest in being enrolled 
and sharing in a division of the Choctaw funds in 
Oklahoma. 

The contention of these latter seems to have been in- 
spired and augmented by certain attorneys who have sent 
agents among these people advising them that they were 
Indians and taking contracts for their enrollment foi* a 
contingent fee of from 30 to 40 per cent of recovery, and 
in many instances a small cash retainer in addition. 

According to statements and admissions of these at- 
torneys and their agents, two firms alone, those of Cant- 
well & Crews, of St. Louis, Mo., and Ballinger & Lee, of 
Washington City, D. C, and Ardmore, Okla., hold^con- 
tracts with 15,596 individuals carrving i:)ixivisions for 
fees aggregating $10,882,815. 

The testimony further shows that a syndicate for the 
purpose of securing the eiu'ollment of Mississippi Clioc- 
taws and a x^articipation in the tribal estate of the 
western Choctaws has been formed under the name *' the 
Texas-Oklahoma Investment Co.," capitalized at $100,000, 
$25,000 of \vhir'li lias been ]iaid in and used. The di- 

.">7017— 1",07 



20 

rectors of this corporation are S. L. Hurlbut, of El 
Campo, Tex.; H. Masterson and W. A. Smith, of Hous- 
ton, Tex.: and T. B. Crews and H. J. Cantwell, of St. 
Louis, Mo. 

This claim of the Mississippi Choctaw attorneys for 
enrolment of their clients and participation in the Choc- 
taw Nation's estate is by no means a new contention. 
The claim was, under direction of law, fully adjudicated 
by the Commission to the Fi^^e Civilized Tribes (H. Doc. 
No. 274, 55th Cong., 2d sess.) and afterwards by the Fed- 
eral court, to which appeal was taken (Jack Amos et al. v. 
The Choctaw Nation, Decisions of United States Courts 
in Indian Territory, 465), both decisions being adverse 
to the Mississippi Choctaw contention for enrollment. 

In rejecting the claim of nonresident Mississippi Choc- 
taws the Commission to the Five Civilized Tribes said in 
part : 

'' This historical review of the acquisitioii of this terri- 
tory by the Choctaw Nation and its subsequent legal rela- 
tions to it makes it clear in the opinion of this commis- 
sion that the Mississippi Choctaws are not under their 
treaties entitled to all rights of Choctaw citizenship except 
an interest in the Choctaw annuities and still continue 
their residence and citizenship in Mississippi." (H. 
Doc. No. 274, 55th Cong., 2d sess.) 

In affirming the decision the United States District 
Court for the Central District of Indian Territory closed 
its decision with the following paragraph : 

' ' To permit men with, perchance, but a strain of Choc- 
taw blood in their veins, who, 65 3^ears ago, broke away 
from their kindred and their nation, and during that 
time, or the most of it, have been exercising the rights 
of citizenship and doing homage to the sovereignty of 
another nation and have become strangers to the people, 
to reach forth their hands from their distant and alien 
homes and lay hold on a part of the public domain, the 
common property of the people, and appropriate to their 
own use, would be unjust and inequitable. It is, there- 
fore, the opinion of the court that the absent Mississippi 
Choctaws are not entitled to be enrolled as citizens of 
the Choctaw Nation. The action of the Dawes Commis- 
sion is therefore affirmed, and a decree will be entered for 
the Choctaw Nation." (Jack Amos et al. v. The Choc- 

37017—15507 



21 

taw Nation, Decisions of United States Courts in Indian 
Territory, 465.) 

An appeal was taken from these decisions by the at- 
torneys for the Mississippi Choctaws to the Supreme 
Court of the United States and the Jack Amos case was 
dismissed upon motion of the attorne^^s foi' the Missis- 
sippi Choctaws (190 U. S., 873). 

Several years subsequent to the date of these decisions 
excluding the Mississippi Choctaws from enrollment this 
matter was again taken up and readjusted by the legally 
constituted authorities of the Federal Government and 
the Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations in Oklahoma, by 
which agreement the JMississippi Choctaws were given 
additional time for identification and establishment of 
bona hde residence in the Choctaw Nation in Indian Ter- 
ritory. (Supplemental agreement, ''An act to ratify 
and affirm the agreement with the Choctaw and Chicka- 
saw Tribes of Indians," etc., approved July 1, 1902.) 

The Choctaw Nation in Oklahoma has dealt justly and 
liberally with the Mississippi Choctaws, always granting 
them full citizenship in their nation, with all emoluments 
thereto, Avhenever they would agree to affiliate with the 
tribe, and the Choctaw Nation in Oklahoma is under no 
legal, equitable, or moral obligation to enroll the ^Slissis- 
sippi Choctaws as citizens of the tribe in the West at this 
time. 

By the agreements negotiated between the Federal 
Government and the Choctaw Nation, all native western 
Choctaws were required to be on the reservation by Jime 
28, 1898, or stand del)arred from enrollment and partici- 
pation in the tribal estate forever tliereafter, and this 
rule has been strictly adhered to. 

The time for establishment of residence on the reser- 
vation was extended to the Mississippi Choctaw claimants 
until July 1, 1903, giving the Mississippi Choctaws five 
years to move on the reservation after the time for es- 
tablishment of such residence had been closed to the na- 
tive Choctaws. 

After 11 years were consumed by the Commission to 
the Five Civilized Tri])es in making up the rolls of the 
Choctaw and Chickasaw Nations such rolls were affirma- 
tively closed by action of Congress on IMarch 4, 1907. 

The rolls of the Choctaw Nation Avere lu^ld oj^en to the 
Mississippi Choctaws from 1830 until ^Tarch 4, 1907, giv- 

37G17— 1o.j07 



22 

ing the Mississippi Choctaws 77 years in whieli to com- 
plete eiirollinent ^Yitll full benefits of citizenship. 

The Federal Government as such is neither legally nor 
equitably obligated to enroll Mississippi Choctaws with 
the Choctaws WTst, and is under only such moral obliga- 
tion to the ]\Iississippi Choctaws as is due to dependent 
North American Indians who were originally occupants 
and owners of the soil and wdio have been deprived of 
their patrimony by w^hite settlers. 

The passage of PI. E. 12586 would completely upset 
and undo 11 years of careful, painstaking work of the 
Interior Department in settling the affairs of the Five 
Civilized Tribes, turn the wheels of progress backwards 
for more than 20 years, and, as has been said by Presi- 
dent Taft, " open up a Pandora's box of troubles, wdiich 
the life of the present generation might not see closed." 

The passage of H. P. 12586 would doubtless result in 
stupendous claims of millions of dollars against the Fed- 
eral Government on the part of the Oklahoma Choctaws, 
because of a division of their funds among persons wdiom 
the Federal commissions and Federal courts have decided 
were not entitled thereto. 

Its passage w^ould lend encouragement to grafting at- 
torneys with contracts for enormous attorneys' fees, run- 
ning into millions of dollars, and hold out inducement for 
procuring additional contracts from spurious claimants. 

Your subcommittee therefore recommends that the 
Harrison bill (H. R. 12586) be not favorably reported by 
the House Committee on Indian Affairs. 

Respectfully submitted. 

C. D. Carter, Chairman, 
J. P. Post. 
RoBT. P. Hill. 
P. P. Ca^ipbell. 

37617—15507 

o 



Part Fourteen 



.J 



[Public — No. 80 — 64th Congress.] 

[H. R. 10385.] 

An Act Making appropriations for the current and contingent 
expenses of the Bureau of Indians Affairs, for fulfilling treaty stipulations with vari- 
ous Indian tribes, and for other purposes, for the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, 
nineteen hundred and seventeen. 

Be it enacted hy tTie Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That the following sums be, 
and they are hereby, appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury 
not otherwise appropriated, for the purpose of paying the current 
and contingent expenses of the Bureau of Indian Affairs, for fullilling 
treaty stipulations with various Indian tribes, and in fidl compen- 
sation for all offices and salaries which are provided for herein for 
the service of the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, nineteen hundred 
and seventeen, namely: 

For the survey, resurvey, classification, and allotment of lands in 
severalty under the provisions of the Act of February eighth, eight- 
een hundred and eighty-seven (Twenty-fourth Statutes at Large, 
page three hundred and eighty-eight), entitled "An Act to provide 
101*' the allotment of lands in severalty to Indians," and under any 
other Act or Acts providing for the survey or allotment of Indian 
lands, $100,000, to be repaid proportionally out of any Indian moneys 
held in trust or otherwise by the United States and available by 
law for such reimbursable purposes and to remain available until ex- 
pended: Provided, That no part of said sum shall be used for the 
survey, resurvey, classification, or allotment of any land in severalty 
on the public domain to any Indian, whether of the Navajo or other 
tribes, within the State of New Mexico and the State of Arizona, 
who was not residing upon the public domain prior to June thirtieth, 
nineteen hundred and fourteen. 

For the construction, repair, and mamtenance of ditches, reservoirs, 
and dams, purchase and use of iri'igation tools and appliances, water 
rights, ditches, lands necessary for canals, pipe lines, and reservoirs 
for Indian reservations and allotments and for drainage and pro- 
tection of irrigable lands from damage by floods, or loss of water 
rights, including expenses of necessary surveys and investigations to 
determine the feasibility and estimated cost of new projects and 
power and reservoir sites on Indian reservations in accordance with 
the provisions of section thirteen of the Act of Juno twenty-fifth, 
nineteen hundred and ten, $235,000, reimbursable as provided in the 
Act of August fii-st, nineteen hundred and fourteen, and to remain 
available until expended: Provided, That no part of this appropri- 
ation shall be expended on any irrigation system or reclamation 
project for which specific appropnation is made in this Act or for 
which public funds are or may be available under any other Act of 
Congress; for pay of one chief inspector of irrigation, who shall bo a 
skilled irrigation en^neer, $4,000; one assistant inspector of irrigation 
who shall he a skilled irrigation engineer, $2,500; for travehng and 
incidental expenses of two mspcctors of irrigation, including sleeping- 



2 (Pub. 80.] 

car fare and a per diem of S3 in lieu of subsistence when actually 
cmplo3^cd on duty in the field and away from designated head- 
quarters, $3,200; in all, $244,700: Provided also, That not to exceed 
seven superintendents of irrigation, six of whom shall be skilled 
irrigation engineers and one competent to pass upon water rights, 
and one field-cost accountant, may be employed. 

For the suppression of the traffic in mtoxicating liquors among 
Indians, $150,000. The provisions of sections twenty-one hundred 
and forty and twenty-one hundred and forty-one of the Revised 
Statutes of the United States shall also apply to beer and other 
intoxicating liquors named in the Act of January thirtieth, eighteen 
hundred and ninety-seven (Twenty-ninth Statutes at Large, page 
five hundred and six), and the possession by a person of intoxicating 
liquors in the country where the introduction is prohibited by treaty 
or Federal statute shall be prima facie evidence of unlawful intro- 
duction. 

For the relief and care of destitute Indians not otherwise provided 
for, and for the prevention and treatment of tuberculosis, trachoma, 
smallpox, and other contagious and infectious diseases, including 
transportation of patients to and from hospitals and sanatoria, 
$350,000: Provided, That not to exceed $90,000 of said amount may 
be expended in the construction and equipment of new hospitals at 
a unit cost of not exceeding $15,000: Provided further, That this 
appropriation may be used also for general medical and surgical 
treatment of Indians, including the maintenance and operation of 
general hospitals, where no other funds are applicable or available 
for that purpose: And 'provided further, That the proviso in the Act 
of August first, nineteen hundred and fourteen (Thirty-eighth 
Statutes at Large, page five hundred and eighty-four), which limits 
the cost of erection and equipment of hospitals authorized therein 
to $15,000 each, is hereby amended so as to approve the expenditure 
of additional sums for the purposes named not exceeding $2,500 in 
any one case: Provided, That the total expenditures for erection and 
equipment of said hospitals shall not exceed $100,000, the aggregate 
amount authorized for that purpose by the Act in question: And 
provided further. That out of the appropriation of $350,000 herein 
authorized, there shall be available lor the maintenance of the sana- 
toria and hospitals hereinafter named, and for incidental and all other 
expenses for their proper conduct and management, including pay of 
employees, repairs, equipment, and improvements, not to exceed the 
following amounts: Blaclvfeet hospital, Montana, $10,000; Carson 
hospital, Nevada, $10,000; Cheyenne and Ai-apahoo hospital, Okla- 
homa, $10,000; Choctaw andCluckasaw hospital, Oldahoma, $20,000, 
$5,000 of which shall be immediately available; Fort Lapwai sana- 
torium, Idaho, $40,000; Laguna sanitorium, New Mexico, $17,000; 
Mcscalero hospital. New Mexico, $10,000; Navajo sanatorium, 
New Mexico, $10,000; Pima hospital, Arizona, $10,000; Phoonix 
sanatorium, Aiizona, $40,000; Spokane hospital, Washington, 
$10,000; Sac and Fox sanatorium, Iowa, $25,000; Turtle Mountain 
hospital. North Dakota, $10,000; Winnebago hospital, Nebraska, 
$15,000; Crow Creek hospital. South Dakota, $8,000; Hoopa Valley 
hospital, California, $8,000; Jicarilla hospital. New Mexico, $8,000; 
Truxton Canyon camp hospital, Aiizona, $8,000; Indian Oasis 
hospital, Arizona, $8,000. 



IPUB. 80.1 3 

^ For support of Indian day and industrial schools not otherwise pro- 
vided for, for other educational and industrial purposes in connection 
therewith, $1,550,000: Provided, That not to exceed $40,000 of this 
amount may be used for the support and education of deaf and dumb 
or blind Indian childi'en: Provided further, That not more than 
$200,000 of the amount herein appropriated may be expended for the 
tuition of Indian children enrolled in the public schools: Provided 
further. That no part of tliis appropriation, or any other appropriation 
provided for herein, except appropriations made pursuant to treaties, 
shall be used to educate children of less than one-fourth Indian blood 
whose parents are citizens of the United States and of the State 
wherein they live and where there are adequate free school facilities 
provided and the facilities of the Indian schools are needed for pupils 
of more than one-fourth Indian blood: And provided further, That no 
part of this appropriation shall be used for the support of Indian day 
and industrial schools where specific appropriation is made. 

For construction, lease, purchase, repair, and improvement of 
school and agency buildings, including the installation, repair, and 
improvement of heating, lighting, power, and water systems in con- 
nection therewith, $400,000: Provided, That the Secretary of the 
Interior is authorized to allow employees in the Indian Service, who 
are furnished quarters, necessary heat and light for such quarters 
without charge, such heat and light to be paid for out of the fund 
chargeable with the cost of heating and lighting other buildings at the 
same place: Provided further, That the amount so expended for 
agency purposes shall not be included in the maximum amounts for 
compensation of employees prescribed by section one, act of August 
twenty-fourth, nineteen hundi'ed and twelve: Provided, That of this 
amount there may be expended for construction of a sewer system and 
purchase of necessary easements therefor, for the Pala Indian 
Reservation, California, $4,000. 

For collection and transportation of pupils to and from Indian and 
public schools, and for placing school pupils, with the consent of their 
parents, under the care and control of white families qualified to give 
them moral, industrial, and educational training, $72,000: Provided, 
That not exceeding $5,000 of this sum may be used for obtaining 
remunerative employment for Indian youths and, when necessary, for 
payment of transportation and other expenses to their places of 
employment. The provisions of this section shaU also apply to 
native Indian pupils of school age under twenty-one years of age 
brought from Alaska. 

For the purposes of preserving living and growing timber on Indian 
reservations and allotments, and to educate Indians in the proper 
care of forests; for the emplo3'ment of suitable persons as matrons to 
teach Indian women and girls housekeeping and otlier houseliold 
duties, for necessary traveling expenses of such matrons; and for 
furnishing necessary equipments and supplies and renting quarters 
for them where necessary; for the conducting of (^xporim(>nts on 
Indian school or agency farms designed to test ttie possibilities of soil 
and climate in the cultivation of trees, grains, vegetables, cotton, and 
fruits, and for the employment of practical farmers and stockmen, in 
addition to the agency and school farmers now employed; for neces- 
sary traveling expenses of such farmers and stockmen and for fur- 
nishing necessary equipment and supplies for them; and for super- 



4 [Pub. 80.) 

intending and directing farming and stock raising among Indians, 
$425,000: Provided, That the foregoing shall not, as to timber, apply 
to the IVIenominee Indian Reservation in Wisconsin: Provided fur- 
ther, That no money appropriated herein shall be expended on or after 
January first, nineteen hundred and seventeen, for the employment 
of any farmer or expert farmer at a salary of or in exceess of $50 per 
month, unless he shall first have procured and filed with the Commis- 
sioner of Indian Affaii-s a certificate of competency showing that he is 
a farmer of actual experience and qualified to instruct others in the art 
of practical agriculture, such certificate to be certified and issued to 
him by the president or dean of the State agricultural college of the 
State in which his services are to be rendered, or by the president or 
dean of the State agricultural college of an adjoining State: Pro- 
vided, That this provision shall not apply to persons now employed in 
the Indian Service as farmer or expert i'armer: And provided further, 
That this shall not apply to Indians employed or to be employed as 
assistant farmer: And provided further, That not to exceed S25,000 of 
the amount herein appropriated may be used to conduct experiments 
on Indian school or agency farms to test the possibilities of soil and 
climate in the cultivation of trees, cotton, grains, vegetables, and 
fruits: Provided, also. That the amounts paid to matrons, foresters, 
farmers, and stockmen herein provided for shall not be included 
within the limitation on salaries and compensation of employees con- 
tained in the Act of August twenty-fourth, nineteen hundred and 
twelve. 

For the purchase of goods and supplies for the Indian Service, 
including inspection, pay of necessary employees, and all other ex- 
penses connected therewith, including advertising, storage, and 
transportation of Indian goods and supphes, 8300,000: Provided, 
That no part of the sum hereby appropriated shall be used for the 
maintenance of to exceed two permanent warehouses in the Indian 
Service: Provided further. That section thirty-seven hundred and 
nine, Revised Statutes, in so far as that section requires that adver- 
tisement be made, shall apply only to those purchases and contracts 
for supplies or services, except personal services, for the Indian field 
service w^hich exceed in amount the sum of S50 each, and section 
twenty-three of the Act of June twenty-fifth, nineteen hundred and 
ten (Thirty-sixth Statutes at Large, page eight hundred and sixty- 
one), is hereby amended accordingly. 

For telegraph and telephone toll messages on business pertaining 
to the Indian Service sent and received by the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs at Washington, $10,000. 

For witness fees and other legal expenses incurred in suits insti- 
tuted in behalf of or against Indians involving the question of title to 
lands allotted to them, or the right of possession of personal ]u-operty 
held by them, and in hearings set by the United States local land 
officers to determine the rights of Indians to public lands, SI, 000: 
Provided, That no part of this appropriation shall be used in the 
payment of attorneys' fees. 

For expenses of the Board of Indian Commissioners, $10,000. 

For pay of Indiaii police, including chiefs of police at not to exceed 
$50 per month each and privates at not to exceed $30 per month each, 
to be employed in maintaining order, for purchase of equipments and 
supplies and for rations for policemen at nonration agencies, $200,000. 



IPuB. 80.] 

For pay of judges of Indian courts where tribal relations now exist, 
$8,000. 

For pay of special agents, at $2,000 per annum; for traveling and 
incidental expenses of such special agents, including sleeping-car fare, 
and a per (]iem of not to exceed $3 in heu of subsistence, in the discre- 
tion of the Secretary of the Interior, when actually employed on 
duty in the field or ordered to the seat of government; for transpor- 
tation antl incidental expenses of officers and clerks of the Office of 
Indian Afl'airs when traveling on oflicial dut}^; for pay of employees 
not otherwise provided for ; antl for other necessary expenses of the 
Indian Service for which no other appropriation is available, $135,000. 

For pay of six Indian Service inspectors, exclusive of one chief 
inspector, at salaries not to exceed $2,500 per annum and actual 
traveling expenses, and $3 per diem in lieu of subsistence when 
actually employed on duty in the field, $30,000. 

For the purpose of determining the heirs of deceased Indian allot- 
tees having any right, title, or interest in any trust or restricted prop- 
erty, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior, 
$100,000: Provided, That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby au- 
thorized to use not to exceed $25,000 for the employment of addi- 
tional clerks in the Indian Office in comiection with the work of 
determining the heirs of deceased Indians, and examining their 
wills, out of the $100,000 appropriated herein: Provided further, 
That the provisions of this paragraph shall not apply to the 
Osage Indians, nor to the Five Civilized Tribes of Indians in 
Oklahoma: And provided further, That hereafter upon a determi- 
nation of the heirs to any trust or restricted Indian property of 
the value of $250 or more, or to any allotment, or after approval 
by the Secretary of any will covering such trust or restricted prop- 
erty, there shall be paid by such heirs, or by the beneficiaries under 
such will, or from tlie estate of the decedent, or from the proceeds 
of sale of the allotment, or from any trust funds belonging to the 
estate of the decedent, the sum of $15, which amount shall be ac- 
counted for and paid into the Treasury of the United States and 
a report shall be made annually to Congress by the Secretary of the 
Interior, on or before the first Monday of December, of all mone3^3 
collected and deposited, as herein provided: Provided further, That 
if the Secretary of the Interior shall find that any iiiheritetl trust 
allotmcjit or allotments are capable of partition to the advantage of 
the heirs, he may cause such lands to be partitioned among them, 
regardless of their competency, patents in fee to be issued to the 
competent heirs for their shares and trust patents to be issued to the 
incompetent heirs for the lands respectively or jointly set apart to 
them, the trust period to terminate in acconhmce with the terms of 
the orighial patent or order of extension of the trust period set out in 
said patent. 

For the purpose of encouraging industry and self-sup j)()it among 
the Indians and to aid thom in the culture of fruits, grains, and other 
crops, $300,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, to bo im- 
mediately available, whicli sum may be used for the purchase of seed, 
animals, machinery, tools, implements, and other equipment neces- 
sary, in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior, to enable 



6 IPUB. 80.J 

Indians to become self-supporting: Provided, That said sum shall be 
expended under conditions to be prescribed by the Secretary of the 
Interior for its repayment to the United States on or before June 
thirtieth, nineteen hundred and twenty-live: Provided further, That 
not to exceed $50,000 of the amount herein appropriated shall be 
expended on any one reservation or for the benefit of any one tribe 
of Indians. 

That not to exceed $200,000 of applicable appropriations made 
herein for the Bureau of Indian Affairs shall be available for the 
maintenance, repair, and operation of motor-propelled and horse- 
drawn passenger-carrying vehicles for the use of superintendents, 
farmers, physicians, field matrons, alloting, irrigation, and other em- 
ployees in the Indian field service: Provided, That not to exceed 
1 15,000 may be used in the purchase of horse-drawai passenger- 
carrying vehicles, and not to exceed $30,000 for the purchase of 
motor-propelled passenger-carrying vehicles, and that such vehicles 
shall be used only for official service. 

That so much of section four of the Act of May eleventh, eighteen 
hundred and eighty (Twenty-first Statutes at Large, page one hun- 
dred and thirty-two), as prohibits granting permission in writing 
or otherwise to any Indian or Indians on any Indian reservation to 
go into the State of Texas, under any pretext whatever, be, aiul the 
same is hereby, repealed. 

That whenever it shall appear to the satisfaction of the Secretary 
of the Interior that the allotted lands of any Indian are arid but 
susceptible of irrigation and that the allottee, by reason of old age 
or other disability, can not personally occupy or improve his allot- 
ment or any portion thereof, such lands or such portion thereof, may 
be leased for a period not exceeding ten j'^ears, under such terms, 
rules, and regulations as may be prescribed by the ^Secretary of the 
of the Interior. 

For payment to the heirs of Farmer Jolin, an Indian, for land 
purchased by the Government for a boathouse site on Pelican Lake, 
Minnesota, $20. 

That the lands, buildings, fixtures, and aU property rights granted 
to the State of Colorado for educational purposes by section five of 
the Act of Congress approved April fourth, nineteen hundred and ten 
(Thirty-sixth Statutes at Large, page two hundred and seventy- 
three), may, in lieu of the use designated in said ^rant, be utilized 
by said State for the care of the insane, as an agricultural experiment 
station, or for such other public purposes as may be authorized by 
the legislature of the State: Provided, That Indians shall always be 
admitted to such institutions free of charge and upon an equality 
with white persons. 

That section two of the Act approved March second, nineteen hun- 
dred and seven (Thirty -fourth Statutes at Large, page twelve hun- 
dred and twenty-one), entitled "An Act providing for the allotment 
and distribution of Indian tribal funds," be, and the same is hereby, 
amended so as to read as follows: 

"That the pro rata share of any Indian who is mentally or phys- 
ically incapable of managing his or her own affairs may be withdrawn 
from the Treasury in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior 
and expended for the benefit of such Indian under such rules, regu- 
lations, and conditions as the said Secretary may prescribe:" Pro- 



fPrs. 80.] 7 

vided, That said funds of any Indian shall not be withdrawn from the 
Treasury until needed by the Indian and upon his application and 
when approved by the Secretary of the Interior. 

For reimbursing Indians for live stock which may be hereafter 
destroyed on account of being infected with dourine or other con- 
tagious diseases, and for expenses in connection with the work of 
eradicating and preventing such diseases, to be ex]3ended under such 
rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe, 
$100,000, said amount to be immediately available and to remain 
available until expended. 

For the payment to Charles J. Kappler for the work of compiling, 
annotating, and indexing the third volume of Indian Laws and 
Treaties, the sum of 82,000. 

Section nine of the Act of March third, . eighteen hundred and 
seventy-five (Eighteenth Statutes at Large, page four hundred and 
fifty), is hereby amended so as to read as follows: 

' 'That hereafter all bidders under any advertisement published by 
the Commissioner of Indian Affairs for proposals for goods, supplies, 
transportation, and so forth, for and on account of the Indian 
Service, whenever the value of the goods, supplies, and so forth, to be 
furnished, or the transportation to be performed, shall exceed the 
sum of $5,000, shall accompany their bids with a certified check, 
draft, or cashier's check, payable to the order of the Commissioner of 
Indian Affairs, upon some United States depository or some one of 
such solvent national banks as the Secretary of the Interior may 
designate, or by an acceptable bond in favor of the United States, 
which check, draft, or bond shall ^e for five per centum of the 
amoimt of the goods, supplies, transportation, and so forth, as 
aforesaid ; and in case any such bidder, on being awarded a contract, 
shall fail to execute the same with good and sufficient sureties ac- 
cording to the terms on which such bid was made and accepted, 
such bidder, or the sureties on his bond, shall forfeit the amount so 
deposited or guaranteed to the United States, and the same shall 
forthwith be paid into the Treasury of the United States; but if 
such contract shall be duly executed, as aforesaid, such draft, check, 
or bond so deposited shall be returned to the bidder." 

ARIZONA AND NEW MEXICO. 

Sec. 2. For support and civilization of Indians in Arizona and 
New Mexico, including pay of employees, S330,000. 

For support and education of two hundred Indian pupils at the 
Indian school at Fort Mojave, Arizona, and for ])ay of superintend- 
ent, S35,100; for general repairs and improvements^ S3, 800; for con- 
struction of a steel tank and tower, $4,000; in all, $42,900. 

For support and education of S(!ven hundred Indian pupils at the 
Indian school at Phoenix, Arizona, and for pay of superintendent, 
$119,400; for general repairs and improvements, $12,500; for the 
purchase of land adjacent to the school property, $3,500; in all, 
$135,400. 

For support and education of one hundred pupils at the In(Hau 
school at Truxton Canyon, Arizona, and for pay of superintendent, 
$18,200; for general r(>.pairs and improvements, $3,000; in all, 
$21,200. 



8 (Pub. 80.1 

For continuing the work of constructing the irrigation system for 
the irrigation of the lands of the Pima Indians in the vicinity of 
Sacaton, on the Gila River Indian Reservation, within the limit of 
cost fixed by the Act of March third, nineteen hundred and five, 
$10,000; and for maintenance and operation of the pumping plants 
and canal systems, $10,000; in all, $20,000, rcim])ursable as pro- 
vided in section two of the Act of August twenty-fourth, nineteen 
hundred and twelve (Thirt3^-seventh Statutes at Large, page five 
hundred and twenty-two), and to remain available until expended. 

For the construction and repair of necessary channels and laterals 
for the utilization of water in connection with the pumping plant for 
irrigation purposes on the Colorado River Indian Reservation, 
Arizona, as provided in the Act of April fourth, nineteen hundred 
and ten (Thirty-sixth Statutes at Large, page two hundred and 
seventy- three), for the purpose of securing an appropriation of water 
for the irrigation of approximately one hundred and fifty thousand 
acres of land and for maintaining and operating the pumping plant, 
$15,000, reimbursable as provided in said iVct, and to remain avail- 
able until expended. 

For improvement and smking of wells, installation of pumping 
machinery, construction of tanks for domestic and stock water, and 
for the necessary structures for the development and distribution of 
a supply of water and for maintenance and operation of constructed 
works, for Papago Indian villages in southern Arizona, $20,000. 

To enable the Secretary of the Interior to carry into effect the 

Provisions of the sixth article of the treaty of June first, eighteen 
undred and sixty-eight, between the United States and the Navajo 
Nation or Tribe of Indians, proclaimed August twelfth, eighteen 
hundred and sixty-eight, whereby the United States agrees to pro- 
vide school facilities for the children of the Navajo Tribe of Indians, 
$100,000: Provided, That the said Secretary may expend said funds, 
m his discretion, in estabUshing or enlarging day or industrial schools. 

For continuing the development of a water supply for the Navajo 
Indians on the" Navajo Reservation, $25,000, to be immediately 
available, reimbursable out of any funds of said Indians now or 
hereafter available. 

For beginning the construction by the Indian Service, of a dam 
with a bridge superstructure and the necessary controlling works 
for diverting water from the Gila River for the irrigation of Indian 
land and Indian allotments on the Gila River Indian Reservation, 
Arizona, as recommended by the Board of Engineers of the United 
States Army in paragraph two hundred and seventeen of its report 
to the Secretary of War of February fourteenth, nineteen hundred 
and fourteen (House Document numbered seven hundred and 
ninety-one), $75,000, to be immediately available and to remain 
available until expended, reimbursable as provided in section two 
of the Act of August twenty-fourth, nineteen hundred and twelve 
(Thirty-seventh Statutes at Large, page five hundred and twenty- 
two), the total cost not to exceed $200,000. 

That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and directed 
to provide for water rights in perpetuity for the irrigation of six 
hundred and thirty-one Salt River Indian allotments of ten acres 
each, to be designated by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, water 
from works constructed under the provision of the Reclamation Act, 



[PPB.80.] 9 

and Acts amendatory thereof or supplemental thereto: Provided, 
That the reclamation fund shall be rennbiirscd therefor upon terms 
the same as those provided in said Act or Acts for reimbursement 
by entrymen on lands irrigated by said works, and there is hereby 
appropriated $20,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, to 
pay the initial installment of the charges when made for said water. 

For beginning the construction by the Indian Service of a diversion 
dam and necessary controUing works for diverting water from the Gila 
River at a site above Florence, Arizona, as estimated by the Board 
of Engineer Officers of tlie United States Army in paragraph one 
hundred and thirty-eight of its report to the wSecretary of War of 
February fourteenth, nineteen hundred and fourteen (House Docu- 
ment Numbered Seven hundred and ninety-one), $75,000, to remain 
available until expended, the total cost not to exceed $175,000: 
Provided, That said dam shall be constructed as a part of a project 
for the irrigation from the natural flow of the Gila River of Indian 
lands on the Gila River Indian Reservation and private and pubUc 
lands in Pinal County, Arizona: And providedfurther, That the water 
diverted from the Gila River by said diversion dam shall be dis- 
tributed by the Secretary of the Interior to the Indian lands of said 
reservation and to the private and public lands in said county in 
accordance with the respective rights and priorities of such lands to 
the beneficial use of said water as may be determined by agreement 
of the owners thereof with the Secretary of the Interior or by a court 
of competent jurisdiction : And provided further, That the construction 
charge for the actual cost of said diversion dam and other works and 
rights shall be divided equitably by the Secretary of the Interior 
between the Indian lands and the private and pubhc lands in said 
county; and said cost as fixed for said Indian lands shall be reim- 
bursable as provided in section two of the Act of August twenty- 
fourth, nineteen hundred and twelve (Thirty-seventh Statutes at 
Large, page five hundred and twenty-two); but the construction 
charge as fixed for the private and public lands in said county shall 
be paid by the owner or entryman ni accordance with the terms of 
an Act extending the period of payment under reclamation projects, 
approved August thirteenth, nineteen hundred and fourteen (Thirty- 
eighth Statutes at Large, page six hundred and eighty-six): Atid 
provided further, That said project shall only bo undertaken if the 
Secretary of the Interior shall be able to make or provide for what 
he shall deem to be satisfactory adjustments of the rights to the 
water to be diverted by saitl diversion dam or carried in canals, 
and satisfactory arrangements for the inclusion of lands within said 
project and the purchase of property" rights which lie shall deem 
necessary to bo acquired, and shall determine and declare said 
project to be feasible. 

For extension of the Ganado irrigation project on the Navajo 
Indian Reservation in Arizona for the irrigation of approximately 
six hundred acres of land in addition to the area to be irrigated by 
said i)roject, as authorized in section two of the Act of August 
twenty-fourth, nineteen hmuh'ed and twelve, $20, ()()(); and for main- 
tenance and operation of the project, $3,000; in aU $23,000, reim- 
bursable and to remain avaihiblc until expended. 

That the Secretary of the lnt(!rior be, and he hereby is, authorized 
and directed to cause to be made by competent engineers the neces- 



10 [Pub. 80.] 

sary examinations, investigations, and surveys for the purpose of 
determining the most suitable and practicable method or methods 
of constructing levees, revetments, or other suitable works sufficient 
to prevent the Gila River from further eroding and wearing and 
washing oway its banks and from further overiiowing its banks at 
any point in Graham County, Arizona. Said engineers shall also 
determine and report upon the most suitable, feasible, and practic- 
able means of holding the said river within a fixed channel as it flows 
through said Graham County. Said Secretary shall submit to Con- 
gress the result of such examinations, investigations, and surveys, 
together with an estimate of the cost thereof, with recommendations 
thereon, at the earhest practicable date. The sum of $10,000, or so 
much thereof as may be necessary, is hereby appropriated, out of 
any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the pur- 
pose of conducting said investigations, examinations, and surveys. 

For the construction of a bridge across the Little Colorado River, 
at or near the town of Winslow, Arizona, 815,000, to be expended 
under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior, and to be reimbur- 
sable from any funds now or hereafter placed in the Treasury to the 
credit of said Indians: Provided, That no part of the money herein 
appropriated shall be expended until the Secretary of the Interior 
shall have obtained from the proper authorities of the State of Ari- 
zona, or the county of Navajo, satisfactory guaranties of the payment 
by the said State of Arizona, or by the county of Navajo, of at least 
one-half of the cost of said bridge, and that the proper authorities of 
the said State of Arizona, or the said county of Navajo, shall assume 
full responsibility for, and will at aU times maintain and repair, said 
bridge and the approaches thereto: And provided further, That any 
and all expenses above the amount herein named in connection with 
the building and maintaining of said bridge shall be borne either by 
the said State of Arizona or the said county of Navajo. 

For the construction of three additional steel spans with abutment 
and piers to extend the bridge across the Gila River on the San 
Carlos Indian Reservation near San Carlos, Arizona, $17,000, or so 
much thereof as may be necessary, to be immediately available, re- 
imbursable to the United States by the Indians having tribal rights 
on said reservation and to remain a charge and lien upon the lands 
and funds belonging to said Indians until paid. 

For preservation and repair of prehistoric pueblo ruins and cliff 
dwellings, under supervasion of the Smithsonian Institution, Navajo 
National Monument, Arizona, $3,000. 

CALIFORNIA. 

Sec. 3. For support and civilization of Indians in California, in- 
cluding pay of employees, $42,000. 

For the purchase of lands for the homeless Indians in California, 
including improvements thereon, for the use and occupancy of said 
Indians, $10,000, said funds to be expended under such regulations 
and conditions as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe. 

For support and education of seven hundred Indian pupils at the 
Sherman Institute, Riverside, California, including pay of super- 
intendent, $119,500; for general repairs and improvements, $10,000; 
in all, $129,500. 



[Pub. 80J 11 

For reclamation and maintenance charge on Yuma allotments, 
$10,000, to remain available until expended and to be reimbursed 
from the sale of surplus lands or from other funds that may be avail- 
able, in accordance with the provisions of the Act of March third, 
nineteen hundred and eleven. 

For support and education of one hundred Indian pupils at the 
Fort Bidwcll Indian School, California, including pay of superintend- 
ent, S18,200; for general repairs and improvements, $3,600; in all, 
$21,800. 

For support and education of one hundred Indian pupils at the 
Greenville Indian School, California, including pay of superintendent, 
$18,400; for genera repairs and improvements, including purchase 
of additional land for school farm, $8,000; in all, $26,400. 

For the improvement and construction of roads and bridges on the 
Yuma Indian Reservation in California, $10,000, to be immediately 
available, reimbursable to the United States by the Indians having 
tribal rights on said reservation. 

FLORIDA. 

Sec. 4. For relief of distress among the Seminole Indians in 
Florida, and for purposes of their civilization and education, $8,000. 

IDAHO. 

Sec. 5. For support and civilization of Indians on the Fort Hall 
Reservation in Idalio, including pay of employees, $30,000. 

For improvement and maintenance and operation of the Fort 
Hall irrigation system, $25,000, reimbursable to the United States 
out of any funds of the Indians occupying the Fort Hall Reservation 
now or hereafter available. 

For fulfilling treaty stipulations with the Bannocks in Idaho: For 
pay of physician, teacher, carpenter, miller, engineer, farmer, and 
blacksmith (article ten, treaty of July third, eighteen hundred and 
sixty-eight), $5,000. 

For the Coeur d'Alenes, in Idaho: For pay of blacksmith, carpen- 
ter, and physician, and purchase of medicines (article eleven, agree- 
ment ratified March third, eighteen hundred and ninety-one), $3,000. 

KANSAS. 

Sec. 6. For support and education of seven hundred and fifty 
Indian pupils at the Indian school, Haskell Institute, Lawrence, 
Kansas, and for pay of superintendent, $127,750; for general repairs 
and improvements," $12,500; for barn, $8,000; in all, $148,250. 

For support and education of eighty Indian pupils at the Indian 
school, Kickapoo Reservation, Kansas, including pay of superin- 
tendent, $14,860; for general repairs and improvements, $2,000; 
in all, $16,860. 

That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to with- 
draw from the Treasury of the United States the sum of $10,000, or 
so much thereof as may be necessary, of the funds on deposit to the 
credit of the Fotawatomi Indians in the State of Kansas, ami to be 
expended under his direction, for the construction of bridges across 



12 IPUB. 80.1 

the Big Soldier Creek and Little Soldier Creek, within the Potawatonii 
Indian Reservation, Jackson County, Kansas: Provided, That no 
part of the money herein appropriated shall be expended until the 
Secretary of the Interior shall have obtained from the proper authori- 
ties of the county of Jackson satisfactory guaranties of the payment 
by the said county of Jackson of at least one-half of the cost of said 
bridges, and that the said proper authorities of the said county of 
Jackson shall assume full responsibility for and will at all times main- 
tain and repair said bridges: And j)rovided further, That any and all 
expenses above the amount herein named in connection with the 
building and maintaining of said bridges shall be borne by the said 
county of Jackson: And provided further, That this appropriation 
shall not become effective until approved by an Indian council to be 
called for that purpose. 

LOUISIANA. 

Sec. 7. For clearing the title to lands owned or possessed by the 
Chettimanchi Band of Indians of Louisiana, for purchase of such lands 
as may be required to place them on a basis of self-support, and for 
such other relief as may be needed in the discretion of the Secretary 
of the Interior, $1,500: Provided, That the Secretary of the Interior 
may, in his discretion, require that the legal title to all property 

Eurchased, or the title to which is to be cleared, with the funds 
ereby appropriated shall be in the name of the United States, for 
the use and benefit of the Indians. 

MICHIGAN. 

Sec. 8. For support and education of three hundred and fifty 
Indian pupils at the Indian school, Mount Pleasant, Michigan, and 
for pay of superintendent, S60,450; for general repairs and improve- 
ments, $5,000; for dairy barn, S8,000; in all, .173,450. 

For reimbursement of Joseph Bradley, a member of the Saginaw, 
Swan Creek, and Black River Band of Chippewa Indians in the State 
of Michigan, for traveling and incidental expenses incurred by him 
as an authorized representative of said band while appearing before 
Congress and the Interior Department in Januar}^, February, and 
March, nineteen hundred and sixteen, $250, or so much thereof as 
may be necessary, to be immediately available. 

MINNESOTA. 

Sec. 9. For support and education of two hundred and twenty- 
five Indian pupils at the Indian school, Pipestone, Miiniesota, includ- 
ing pay of superintendent, $39,175; for general repairs and improve- 
ments, and for remodeling building for dormitoiy purposes, $7,000; 
for mechanical and general utility shop building, $10,000; for septic 
tank, $5,500; to gravel and improve the road leading from tlie 
school buildings to the south line of the reservation, $1,000: to ])last 
out and deepen the ditch and creek on said reservation, $2,000; in 
all, $64,675. 



[Pub. 80.1 13 

For support of a school or schools for the Chippewas of the Mis- 
sissippi in Minnesota (article three, treaty of March nineteenth, 
eighteen hundred and sixty-seven), $4,000. 

The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to withdraw 
from the Treasury of the United States, at his discretion, the sum 
of $185,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, of the principal 
sum on deposit to the credit of the Chippewa Indians in the State of 
Minnesota, arising under section seven of the Act of January four- 
teenth, eighteen hundred and eighty-nine, entitled "An Act for the 
relief and civilization of the Chippewa Indians in the State of Min- 
nesota," and to use the same for the purpose of promoting civiliza- 
tion and self-support among the said Indians in manjier and for 
purposes provided for in said Act: Provided, That not to exceed 
$60,000 of said amount, and the one-fourth interest on the tribal 
funds of tlie Chippewa Indians of Minnesota now to their credit in 
the Treasury to be used for the maintenance of free schools, shall 
be used for the compensation of employees in the Indian Service in 
Mmnesota except for hregular laborers, and that the said Chippewas 
shall receive the preference in fiUing permanent positions in the 
service of the Chippewas of Minnesota where the compensation is 
paid from their tribal funds: Provided further, That not less than 
$10,000 of said amount of $185,000 may be used to furnish employ- 
ment to the said Chippewas in building roads and making other 
improvements upon the Chippewa reservations in Minnesota for the 
benefit of the said Chippewas, and $10,000, or so much thereof as 
may be necessary, to establish an electric light plant at the Wliite 
Earth Agency, the boarding school there and the village of Wliite 
Earth, Minnesota, said plant, or its proportionate share of expenses 
to be maintained by the residents of Wliite Earth village under such 
rules and regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the 
Interior. 

The Secretary of the Interior is liereby authorized to advance to 
the executive committee of the White Earth Band of Chippewa 
Indians in Minnesota the sum of $1,000, or so much thereof as may 
be necessary, to be expended in the annual celebration of said band 
to be held June fourteenth, nineteen hundred and sixteen, out of 
the funds belonging to said band. 

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized 
to convey by patent in fee simple to independent school district 
numbered one, of Mahnomen County, Minnesota, for the pur|)ose 
of a demonstration farm in connection with the agricultural depart- 
ment of the pul^lic scliools of said place, that certain tract of land 
which had been set apart for the now abandoned Mahnomen Indian 
day school, said tract l)eing described as follows, to wit: W\^st half 
of the southwest fjuarter of section eleven, township one hundred 
and forty-four north, range forty-two west of the fifth principal 
meridian, in Mhmesota: Provided, That the purchase price of the 
property conveyed, wliich shall be not less than its appraised value, 
shall be divided equally among those mem])ers of the Pembina Band 
of Indians living on the date of passage of this Act who were l)oni 
prior to July twenty-first, nineteen hundred, but were not included 
on the allotment schedule approved on that date; appraisement of 
the property and payment of the proceeds to the said Indians to be 
under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior 



14 Pub. 80.] 

may prescribe: Provided further, That this shall not be construed 
to affect any rights involved in pending litigation. 

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized 
and directed to issue to the Nortiiern Minnesota Conference of the 
Methodist Episcopal Church a patent in fee for forty acres of land on 
the Nett Lake Indian Reservation in Minnesota, described as follows: 
South half of northeast quarter of lot one; north half of southeast 
quarter of lot one: south half of north half of northeast quarter of 
lot one; north half of south half of southeast quarter of lot one; 
south half of northeast quarter of northwest quarter; and south 
half of south half of north half of northeast quarter of northwest 
quarter, all in section nineteen, township sixty-five north, range 
twenty-one west of the fourth principal meridian containing forty- 
acres more or less; such patent to be in lieu of that authorized and di- 
rected in the Act of August first, nineteen hundred and fourteen 
(Thirty-eighth Statutes at I^arge, page live hundred and ninety-one). 

That the Secretary of the Interior, under such rules and regula- 
tions as he may prescribe, is hereby authorized to advance to any 
individual Chippewa Indian in the State of Minnesota entitled to 
participate in the permanent fund of the Chippewa Indians of Min- 
nesota one-fourth of the amount which would now be coming to said 
Indian under a pro rata distribution of said permanent fund: Pro- 
vided, That the Secretary of the Interior, under such rules and regu- 
lations as he may prescribe, ma}^ use for or advance to any Chippewa 
Indian in the State of Minnesota entitled to share in said fund who 
is mcompetent, blind, crippled, decrepit, or helpless from old age, 
disease, or accident, one-fourth of the amount which would now be 
coming to said Indian under a pro rata distribution of said perma- 
nent fund: Provided furilier, That any money received hereunder by 
any member of said tribe or used for his or her benefit shall be 
deducted from the share of said member in the permanent fund of 
the said Chippewa Indians in Minnesota to which ne or she would be 
entitled: Provided furtlier, That the funds hereunder to be paid to 
Indians shall not be subject to any lien or claim of attorneys or other 
third parties. 

The superintendent of logging upon the Chippewa Reservations in 
Minnesota is hereby authorized to expend not to exceed $25,000, or 
so much thereof as may be necessary, from the amount derived from 
the sale of the pine timber of the Chippewas of Minnesota, in the 
payment of scalers, check scalers, as provided by the Act of January 
fourteenth, eighteen hundred and eighty-nme (I'wenty-fifth Statutes 
at Large, page six hundred and forty-two), and such clerks as he 
may employ. Any Act not in conformity with this provision is 
hereby repealed. A detailed statement of all the expenses herein- 
after mcurred and paid from the tribal funds of the Chippewas of 
Minnesota shall be reported to Congress annually. 

That the sum of $6,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, 
of the tribal funds of the Chippewa Indians of the State of Minnesota, 
is hereby appropriated to pay the expenses of the general council of 
said tribe to be held at Bemidji, Minnesota, beginnmg on the second 
Tuesday of July, nineteen himdred and sixteen, pursuant to the con- 
stitution of the general council of said Chippewa Indians of Minne- 
sota, organized in May, nineteen hundred and thirteen, and to pay 
the actual and necessary expenses of the delegates who attended the 



[PTTB.80.1 15 

meeting of said general council, commencing June twelfth and ending 
June fourteenth, nineteen hundred and fifteen, at White Earth, 
Minnesota, and at Detroit, Minnesota, October fourth, nineteen 
hundred and fifteen, and also the necessary expenses of the members of 
the executive committee of said council when attending to the busi- 
ness of the tribe, and to pay the expenses to Washington, in January 
and February, nineteen hundred and fifteen, and in .lanuary, Feb- 
ruary, and March, nineteen hundred and sixteen, of the delegations 
of the Chippewa Indians of the State of Minnesota, appointed by the 
president of said general council pursuant to the resolutions of said 
general councils of August fourteenth, nineteen hundred and four- 
teen, and June fourteenth, nineteen hundred and fifteen, to present 
the affairs of said Indians of the State of Minnesota to the ofhcials of 
the United vStates; said $6,000 to be immediately available, and the 
expenses of said delegation to be paid by the Secretary of the Interior 
upon itemized accounts approved by the president of the executive 
committee of said council and certified to by the secretary of the 
council. The Secretary of the Interior may authorize an inspector, 
or special agent, or Indian superintendent, to attend future sessions 
of said general council and conventions to which delegates therefor 
are elected. 

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized 
to withdraw from the Treasury of the United States $500, or so much 
thereof as may be necessary, of the principal sum on deposit to the 
credit of the Chippewa Indians in the State of Minnesota, arising 
under section seven of the Act of January fourteenth, eighteen 
hundred and eighty-nine, entitled "An Act for the reJief and civiliza- 
tion of the Chippewa Indians in the State of Minnesota," and to use 
said withdrawn sum in the purchase and fencing of burial grounds 
for the Fond du Lac Band oi Chippewa Indians of Minnesota. 

For the tuition, board, books and paper and traveling expenses to 
and from their respective homes of two Chippewa boys for the school 
year ending June tenth, nineteen hundred and fifteen, $1,500; and 
lor five Chippewa boys for the school year ending June tenth, nine- 
teen hundred and sixteen, $3,250; incurred under the authorit}'^ of the 
general council of the Minnesota Chippewas, said amounts to be paid 
upon vouchers beinf; submitted to the Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 
and approved by the board of Indian education of the said general 
councd: Provided, That the said payments shall be made from the 
tribal funds of the Chippewa Indians of Minnesota in the Treasury of 
the United States. 

That the sixth paragraph of section nine of the Act approved June 
thirtieth, nineteen hundred and thirteen (Thirty-eighth Statutes at 
Large, page eighty-nine), bo, and the same hereby is, amended by 
striking out the words "one of whom shall be selected by the Depart- 
ment of Justice," in the third line thereof, and substituting therefor 
the words "one of whom shall be selected from assistants to the 
Attorney General, and who shall continue as such commissioner 
during the pleasure and under the direction of the Attorney General." 

That the unexpended balance of $3,436.03 of the appropriation 
for carrying into effect the provisions of the Act of Juno thirtieth, 
nineteen hundred and thirteen, making appropriations for current 
and continj^cnt expenses of the Indian Service for the fiscal year ending 
June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and fourteen (Tliirty-eighth Stat- 



16 \PVB- 80.J 

utes at Large, page eighty-nine), creating a commission to prepare a 
roll of the allottees within the White Earth Reservation, in the State 
of Minnesota, and defining the duties of such commission, is herehy 
reappropriated and made imme(hately available for the payment of 
expenses incurred and salaries (uirned by the said commissioners, or 
under their direction, in carrying out the provisions of said Act since 
June thirtieth, nineteen liundrod and fourteen, and for the purpose 
of continuing the work of such commission under said Act. 

Tliat for the completion of the enrollment of the allottees within 
the White Earth Reservation, in the State of Minnesota, required by 
the Act of eTune tliirtieth, nineteen hundred and thirteen, as amended 
by this Act, there is hereby appropriated the sum of S5,000, or so 
much thereof as may be necessary for that purpose. This appropria- 
tion shah continue available until expended or the work of the said 
commission shall have been completed. 

To carry into effect the Act entitled "An Act for the relief and civi- 
ilization of the Chippewa Indians in the State of Minnesota, approved 
January fourteenth, eighteen hundred and eighty-nine, to provide 
for the establishment and administration of a forest reserve and for 
the sale of timber within the Red I^ake Indian Reservation, Minne- 
sota^" that the following-described lands within the Red Lake Indian 
Reservation, Minnesota, be, and the same hereby are, created into 
a forest reserve, to be known as the Red Lake Indian Forest: Town- 
ships one hundred and fifty and one hundred and fifty-one north, 
ranges thirty-two, thirty-three, thirty-four, thirty-five, and thirty- 
six west, and townships one hundred and fifty-two and one hundri^d 
and fifty-three north, ranges thirty-two, thirty-three, and thirty- 
four west of the fifth principal meridian, except the lands in town- 
ships one hundred and fifty-one north, range thirty -six west, which 
lie north of the north fine of sections twenty-six to thirty, inclusive, 
and except aU lands within sections four, five, six, seven, eight, nine, 
and eighteen, in township one hundred and fifty-three north, range 
tliirty-four west. The provisions of this paragraph shall not apply 
to any lands which have heretofore been reserved for school, agency, 
church, or town-site purposes or granted to private parties or corpora- 
tions within the area described, nor to the town site of Red Ijake, for 
the creation of wliich provision is made herein: Provided, That when 
any of said lands are no longer needed for the purpose for which they 
are reserved, the Secretary of the Interior may declare such lands 
to be a part of the Red Lake Indian Forest. 

That lands within said Red Lake Indian forest, which are not cov- 
ered with standing and growing merchantable })ine timber and which 
are suited for the production of agricultural crops and which are front- 
ing upon a lake shore, may bo allotted to individual Red Lake Indians: 
Proinded, That no such allotmtnit shall exceed eighty acres nor have 
more than eighty rods fronting upon a lake shore: Provided furiher, 
That in case an Indian -has improved and cultivated more than eighty 
acres, his allotment may embrace his improvements to the extent of 
one hundred and sixty acres. 

That said forest shall ])e administered by the Secretary of the Inte- 
rior in accordance with the ])rinciples of scientific forestry, with a view 
to the production of successive timber crops thereon, and he is hereby 
authorized to sell and manufacture only such standing and growing 



^0 I 

[PCB, 80,1 17 

]Mno and oak timber as is mature and has ceased to grow, and he is also 
authorized to sell and manufacture form time to time such other ma- 
ture and marketable timber as he may deem advisable, and he is fur- 
ther authorized to construct and operate sawmills for the manufacture 
of the timber into merchantable products and to emj)loy such persons 
as he shall find necessary to carry out the purposes of the foregoing 
provisions, includmg the establishment of nurseries and the purchase 
of seeds, seedlings, and trans])lants when needed for reforestation pur- 
l)oses: Provided, That all timlter sold under the provisions herein shall 
!)(> sold on what is known as tlu^ bank scale: Provided further, That no 
contract shall be ma(k^ for the establishment of any mill, or to carry on 
any logging or lumbering operations which shall constitute a charge 
upon the proceeds of the timber, until an estimate of the cost thereof 
shall have fii*st been submitted to and approved by Congress. 

That the Secretary of the Interior may issue permits or grant leases 
on such lands for camping or farming. No permit shall be issued for a 
longer term than one year and no lease shall be executed for a longer 
term than five years. Every permit or lease issued under authority of 
this Act to Indians, or to other persons or corporations, and every pat- 
ent for an allotment within the limits of the forest created by section 
one, shall reserve to the United States the right to cross tiie land cov- 
ered thereby with logging roads or railroads, to use the shore line, or to 
erect thereon and use such structures as shall be necessary to the 
l)roper and economical management of the Indian Forest created by 
this Act; and the Secretary of the Interior may reserve from allotment 
tracts considered necessary for such administration. 

After the payment of all expenses connected with the administra- 
tion of these lands as herein provided, the net proceeds therefrom shall 
])e covered into the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the 
Kcd Lake Indians and (h-aw interest at the rate of four per centum per 
annum. The interest on this fund may be used by the Secretary of the' 
Interior in such manner as he shall consider most advantageous and 
beneficial to the Red Lake Indians. Expenditure from the principal 
shall })e made only after the approval by Congress of estimates sub- 
mitted by the said Secretary. 

That the Secretary of the Interior shall select and set apart an area 
not exceeding two hun(h'(>d acres, in sections twenty, twenty-one, 
twenty-eight, and twenty-nine, township one hundred and fifty-one 
north, range thirtv-four west, cause the lands thus selected to be sur- 
veyed and ])latte(i into suitable lots, streets, and alleys, and dedicate 
said streets and alleys and such lots and parcels as he may consider 
necessary to public us{>s. The lands thus selected shall not be allotted, 
])ut lield as an Indian town site subject to further legislation by 
Congress. 

That the timber on lands of the Red Lake Indian Reservation out- 
side the boundaries of the forest created by this Act may be sold imder 
regulations prescrilx'd l)y tlie Secretary of the Intei'ior, and the jiro- 
ceeds achninistered nnder the provisions of {]\v g(>neral (h^ficiency Act 
of March third, eigliteen liuiKh'ed and eiglity-tliree (Twenty-second 
Statutes at Large, page five liinuh'ed and ninety), and the Incban ap- 
propriation Act of March second, eighteen hmuh-ed and eighty-seven 
(Twenty-fourth Statutes at Large, page four hundred and sixty-three). 

Pub. No. 80 2 



18 tPuB. 80.' 

MISSISSIPPI. 

Sec. 10. To enable the Secretary of the Interior to investigate the 
condition of the Indians living in Mississippi and report to Congress on 
the first Monday of next December as to their need for additional land 
and school facilities, $1,000, to be immediately available. 

MONTANA. 

Sec. 11 . For support and civilization of the Indians at Fort Belknap 
Agency, Montana, including pay of employees, $20,000. 

For support and civilization of Indians at Flathead Agency, Mon- 
tana, mcluding pay of employees, $20,000, of which amount not ex- 
ceeding $4,500 shall be expended for salaries. 

For support and civilization of Indians at Fort Peck Agency, Mon- 
tana, including pay of employees, $30,000. 

For support and civilization of Indians at Blackfeet Agency, 
Montana, including pay of employees, $2.5,000. 

For mamtenance and operation, including repairs, of the irrigation 
systems on the Fort Belknap Reservation, in Montana, $20,000, 
reimbursable in accordance with the prov^isions of the Act of April 
fourth, nineteen hundred and ten. 

For fulfdling treaties with Crows, Montana: For pay of pliysician, 
$1,200; and for pay of carpenter, miller, engineer, farmer, and black- 
smith (article ten, treaty of May seventh, eighteen hundred and sixty- 
eight), $3,600; for pay of second blacksmith (article eiglit, same 
treaty), $1,200; in all, $6,000. . 

For subsistence and civilization of the Northern Cheyennes and 
Arapahoes (agreement with the Sioux Indians, approved February 
twenty-eight, eighteen hundred and seventy-seven), including North- 
ern Cheyennes removed from Pine Ridge Agency to Tongue River, 
"Montana, and for pay of physician, two teachers, two carpenters, 
one miller, two farmers, a blacksmith, and engineer (article seven, 
treaty of May tenth, eighteen hundred and sixty-eight), $80,000. 

For the employment of "line riders " along the southern and eastern 
boundaries of the Northern Cheyenne Indian Resej'vation in the 
State of Montana, $1 ,500. 

For the support and civilization of Rocky Boy's Band of Chippewas, 
and other moigent and homeless Indians in the State of Montana, 
including pay of employees, $5,000. 

Tliat the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized to 
withdraw from the Treasury of the United States not to exceed the 
sum of $100,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, of the 
principal sum on deposit to the credit of the Indians on the Blackfeet 
Reservation in Montana, for the purpose of purchasing and carmg 
for cattle for the use of individual Indians, seeds, and necessary 
farming ef|uipment, to enable them to become self-supporting: 
Provided, ITiat said sum shall be expended under conditions to be 
prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior for its repayment and 
placed into the Treasury to the credit of the said tribe on or before 
June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and twenty-five: Provided further, 
Tliat the Secretary of the Interioi shall submit to Congress annually 
on the first Monday in December a detailed statement as to the ex- 
penditure of this fund. 



[Pub. 80.) 19 

For the purchase of a strip of land contaming sixteen acres, more or 
less, lying between the Flathead River and the Flathead Indian 
Agency reserve, Montana, for an addition to said reserve, S820, and 
said amount shall be reimbursed to the United States from the pro- 
ceeds arising from the sale of lands and timber within the Flathead 
Indian Reservation. 

lliat lands on the Flathead Indian Reservation in Montana valuable 
for agricultural or horticultural purposes, heretofore classified as 
timber lands, may, in the discretion oi tlie Secretary of the Interior, 
be appraised and opened to homestead entry under regulations pre- 
scribed by him, upon condition that homestead entrymen shall at 
the time of makmg their original homestead entries pay the full value 
of the timber found on the land at the time that the appraisement 
of the land itself is made, such payment to be in addition to the 
appraised price of the lands apart from the tunber. 

For continuing construction of the irrigation systems on the Flat- 
head Indian Reservation, in Montana, $750,000 (reimbursable), which 
shall be immediately available and remain available until expended: 
Promded, That the payments for the proportionate cost of tlic con- 
struction of said systems required of settlers on the surplus unallotted 
land by section nine, chapter fourteen hundred ninety-live. Statutes 
of the United States of America, entitled "An Act for the survey and 
allottment of lands now embraced within the limits of tlie Flathead 
Indian Reservation in the State of Montana, and the sale and dis- 
posal of aU surplus lands after allotment," as amended by section 
fifteen of the Act of May twenty-ninth, nineteen hundred and eight 
(Thirty-fifth Statutes at Large, page four hundred and forty-eight), 
shall be made as herein provided: Provided further, That nothing 
contained in the Act of May twenty-ninth, nineteen hundred and 
eight (Thirty-fifth Statutes at Large, page four hundred and forty- 
four), shall be construed to exempt the purchaser of any Indian allot- 
ment purchased prior to the expiration of the trust period thereon 
from any charge for construction of the irrigation system incurred 
up to the time of such purchase, except such charges as shall have 
accrued and become due in accordance with the public notices herein 

frovided for, or to relieve the ow^ners of any or all land allotted to 
ndians in severalty from payment of the charges hereiii required 
to be made against said land on account of construction of the irri- 
gation systems; and in carrying out the provisions of said section 
the exemption therehi authorizccl from charges incurred against allot- 
ments purchased prior to the expiration of the trust period tliereon 
shall ))e the amount of the charges or instalhnents thereof due under 
public notice herein provided for up to the tune of such purchase. 

For continuing construction of the irrigation systems on the Fort 
Peck Indian Reservation, in Montana, S100,000 (reimbursa))le), which 
shall be immediately available: Provided, That the proportionate 
cost of the construction of said systems required of settlers and entry- 
men on the surplus unallotted irrigable land by section two of the 
Act of May thirtieth, nineteen hundred antl eight (Thirty-lifth Stat- 
utes at Large, |)age five hundred and lifty-eight), shall be ])aid as 
herein providecl : Provided further, That notliing contained in said 
Act of May thirtieth, nineteen hundred and eight, shall be con- 
strued to exempt tlie purchaser of any Indian allotment purchased 
prior to the expiration of the trust period thereon from any charge 



20 (Pub. 80.1 

for construction of the irrigation system incurred up to the time of 
such purchase, except such charges as shall have accrued and become 
due in accordance with the public notices herein provided for, and 
the purchaser of any Indian allotment to be irrigated by said systems 
purchased upon approval of the Secretary of the Interior before the 
charges against said aUotment herein authorized shall have been paid 
shall pay aU charges remaining unpaid at the time of such purchase, 
and in all patents or deeds for such purchased allotments, and also 
in all patents in fee to aUottees or their heirs issued before payment 
shaU have been made of aU such charges herein authorized to be 
made against their allotments, there shall be expressed that there is 
reserved upon the lands therein described a lien for such charges, 
and such lien may be enforced, or upon payment of the delinquent 
charges may be released by the Secretary of the Interior. 

For continuing construction of the irrigation systems on the 
Blackfeet Indian Reservation, in Montana, $25,000 (reimbursable), 
which shall be immediately available : Provided, That the entrjTnan 
upon the surplus unallotted lands to be irrigated by such systems shall, 
in addition to compliance with the homestead laws, before receiving 
patent for the lands covered by his entry, pay the charges apportioned 
against such tract as herein authorized, and a failure to make any 
two pa3rments when due shall render the entry subject to cancella- 
tion, with the forfeiture to the United States of aU rights acquired 
under the provisions of this act, as well as of any moneys paid on 
account thereof. The purchaser of any Indian allotment to be irri- 
gated by such systems, purchased upon approval of the Secretary 
of the Interior, before the charges against said aUotment herein 
authorized shall have been paid, shaU pay all charges remaining 
unpaid at the time of such purchase and in all patents or deeds for 
such purchased aUotments, and also in aU patents in fee to allottees 
or their hehs issued before pajrment of all such charges herein author- 
ized to be made agamst their aUotments, there shall be expressed 
that there is reserved upon the lands therein described a lien for such 
charges, and such lien may be enforced, or, upon pa3anent of the 
delinquent charges, may be released by the Secretary of the Interior. 

The work to be done with the amounts herein appropriated for the 
completion of the Blackfeet, Flathead, and Fort Feck projects may 
be done by the Reclamation Service on plans and estmiates furnished 
by that service and approved by the Commissioner of Indian Affairs: 
Provided, That not to exceed $15,000 of applicable appropriations 
made for the Flathead, Blackfeet, and Fort Feck irrigation projects 
shaU be available for the maintenance, re})air, and operation of motor- 
propelled and horse-drawn passenger-carrying vehicles for oflicial 
use upon the aforesaid irrigation projects: Provided furtlier , That not 
to exceed $7,500 may be used for the purchase of horse-drawn pas- 
senger-carrying vehicles, and that not to exceed $1,500 may be used 
for the purchase of motor-propeUed passenger-carrying vehicles. 

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized 
and directed to announce, at such time as in his opinion seems proper, 
the charge for construction of irrigation systems on the Blackfeet, 
Flathead, and Fort Peck Indian Reservations in Montana, which 
shall be made against each acre of land irrigable by the systems on 
each of said reservations. Such charges shall be assessed against the 
land UTigable by the systems on each said reservation in the pro- 



[Pub. 80.] 21 

portion of the total construction cost which each acre of such land 
bears to the whole area of irrigable land thereunder. 

On the first day of December after the announcement by the 
Secretary of the Interior of the construction charge the allottee, 
entryman, purchaser, or owner of such irrigable land which might 
have been furnished water for irrigation during the whole of the 
preceding irrigation season, from ditches actually constructed, shall 
pay to the superintendent of the reservation where the land is located, 
for deposit to the credit of tlie United States as a reimbursement of 
the appropriations made or to be made for construction of said 
irrigation systems, five per centum of the construction charge fixed 
for his land, as an initial installment, and shall pay the balance of the 
charge in fifteen annual installments, the first five of which shall 
each be five per centum of the construction charge and the remainder 
shall each be seven per centum of the construction charge. The 
first of the annual installments shall become due and payable on 
December first of the fifth calendar year after the initial installment : 
Provided, That any allottee, entryman, purchaser, or owner may, if 
he so elects, pay the whole or any part of the construction charges 
within any shorter period: Provided furtlier, That the Secretary of 
the Interior may, in his discretion, grant such extension of the time 
for payments herein required from Indian allottees or their heirs as 
he may determine proper and necessary, so long as such land remains in 
Indian title. 

That the tribal funds heretofore covered into the Treasury of the 
United States in partial reimbursement of appropriations made for 
constructing irrigation systems on said reservations shall be placed to 
the credit of the tribe and be available for such expenditure for the 
benefit of the tribe as Congress may hereafter direct. 

The cost of constructing the irrigation systems to irrigate allotted 
lands of the Indians on these reservations shall be reimbursed to 
the United States as hereinbefore provided, and no further reim- 
bursements from the tribal funds shall be made on account of said 
irrigation works except that all charges against Indian allottees or 
their heirs herein authorized, unless otherwise paid, may be paid 
from the individual shares in the tribal funds, wlien the same is 
available for distribution, in the discretion of the Secretary of the 
Interior. 

That in addition to the construction charges every allottee, entry- 
man, purchaser, or owner shall pay to the superintendent of the 
reservation a maintenance and operation charge based upon the 
total cost of maintenance and operation of the systems on the several 
reservations, and the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized 
to fix such maintenance and operation charge upon such basis as 
shall be equitable to the owners of the irrigable land. Such charges 
when collected shall be available for exj)emliture in the maintenance 
and operation of the systems on the reservation where collected: 
Provided, That delivery of water to any tract of land may be refu.sed 
on account of n(jnj)ayment of any charges herein authorized, and 
the same may, in the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior, bo 
collected by a suit for money owed: Provided further, That the 
rights of the United States heretofore acquired, to water for Indian 
lands referred to in the foregoing provision, namely, the Blackfeet, 



22 [Pub. 80.) 

Fort Peck, and Flathead Reservation land, shall be continued in full 
force and effect until the Indian title to such land is extinguished. 
That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized 
to prescribe such rules and regulations and issue such notices as may 
be necessary to carry into effect the provisions of this Act, and he is 
hereby authorized and directed to determine the area of land on each 
reservation which may be irrigated from constructed ditches and to 
determine what allowance, if any, shall be made for ditches con- 
structed by individuals for the diversion and distribution of a partial 
or total water supply for allotted or surplus unallotted land: Pro- 
vided, That if water be available prior to the announcement of the 
charge herein authorized, the Secretary of the Interior may furnish 
water to land under the systems on the said reservations, making a 
reasonable charge therefor, and such charges when collected may be 
used for construction or maintenance of the systems through which 
such water shall have been furnished. 

NEBRASKA. 

Sec. 12. For support and education of four hundred Indian pupils 
at the Indian school at Genoa, Nebraska, including pay of superin- 
tendent, $68,800; for general repairs and improvements, $5,000; for 
new boilers at power plant, extension of lighting system and of water 
and sewer main, and for construction of septic tank, $10,800; for 
the purpose of making necessary repairs on the Government bridge 
across the Niobrara River near Niobrara, Nebraska; also to recon- 
struct one span of ninety feet over the back channel of the Niobrara 
River at the same point, the sum of $6,500; said sum to be expended 
under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior; in all, $91,100. 

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized, 
in his discretion, to approve the assessments, together wdth maps 
showing right of way and definite location of proposed drainage 
ditches to be made under the laws of the State of Nebraska upon the 
allotments of certain Omaha and Winnebago Indians in Wakefield 
drainage district, in Dixon, Wayne, and Thurston Counties in 
Nebraska. 

That the vSecretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized 
to pay the amount assessed against each of said allotments: Pro- 
vided, That said assessment shall not exceed $10 per acre on any 
allotment or portion thereof; and there is hereby appropriated for 
said purpose, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appro- 
priated, the sum of $.30,000, to be immediately available, the said 
sum to be reimbursable from the rentals of said allotments, not to 
exceed fifty per centum of the amount of rents received annually, or 
from any funds belonging to the said allottees, in the discretion of the 
Secretary of the Interior. 

That the Secretary of the Interior bo, and he is hereby, authorized, 
in his discretion, to' approve deeds for right of way from such said 
allottees or their heirs as may be necessary to permit the construc- 
tion and maintenance of said drainage ditch upon the payment of 
adequate damages therefor. 

That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to approve 
the assessments upon aU other restricted allotments located within 
any proposed drainage district located and made under the laws of 
the State of Nebraska. 



iPuB. 80. 23 

That in the event any allottees shall receive a patent in fee to any 
allotment of land in any lawfully constituted drainage district within 
the State of Nebraska before the United States shall have been wholly 
reimbursed as herein provided, the amount remaining unpaid shall 
become a first lien on such allotment, and the fact of such lien shall 
be recited on the face of each patent in fee issued and the amount of 
the lien set forth thereon, and the receipt of the Secretary of the 
Interior, or of the officer, agent, or employee duly authorized by 
him for that purpose, for the payment of the amount assessed against 
any allotment as herein provided shall, when duly recorded by the 
recorder of deeds in the county wherein the land is located, operate as 
a satisfaction of such lien. 

That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to perform 
any and all acts and to make such rules and regulations as may be 
necessary and proper for the purpose of carrying these provisions into 
full force and effect. 

NEVADA. 

Sec. 13. For support and civilization of Indians in Nevada, in- 
cluding pay of employees, $18,500. 

For support and education of two hundred and ninety Indian 
pupils at the Indian school at Carson City, Nevada, including pay of 
superintendent, $50,430; for general repairs and improvements, 
$8,000; for irrigating school farm, $4,000; in all, $62,430. 

For the purpose of procuring home and farm sites, with adequate 
water rights, and providing agricultural equipment and instruction 
and other necessary supplies for the nonreservation Indians in the 
State of Nevada, $15,000: Provided, That no part of this appropria- 
tion shall be expended for mileage, salaries, or expenses of employees. 

For the improvement, enlargement, and extension of the irrigation 
diversion and distribution system to irrigate approximately three 
thousand three hundred acres of Indian land on the Pyramid Lake 
Reservation, Nevada, $30,000, reimbursable from any funds of said 
Indians now or hereafter available, and to remain available until 
expended: Provided, That the cost of said entire work shall not 
exceed $85,000. 

For the purchase of land and water rights for the Washoe Tribe 
of Indians, the title to which is to be held in the United States for 
the benefit of said Indians, $10,000, to be immediately available; for 
the support and civilization of said Indians, $5,000; in all, $15,000, 

NEW MEXICO. 

Sec. 14. For support and education of four hundred and fifty 
Indian pupils at the Indian school at Albuquerque, New Mexico, and 
for pay of superintendent, $77,400; for general repairs and improve- 
ments, $8,000; for the purchase of additional acreage adjoining or 
in the vicinity of the school farm, $12,000; in all, $97,400. 

For support and education of three hundred and fifty Indian pupils 
at the Indian school at wSanta Fo, Now Mexico, and for pay of super- 
intendent, $59,550; for general repairs and improvements, $6,000; 
for water supply, $1,600; for the construction of an assembly hall and 
gymnasium, $25,000; in all, $92,150. 



24 iPuB. 80.] 

For the pay of one special attorney for the Pueblo Indians of New 
Mexico, to be designated by the Secretary of the Interior, and for 
necessary travehng expenses of said attorney, $2,000, or so much 
thereof as the Secretary of the Interior may deem necessary. 

For construction work on the Indian highway extending from the 
Mesa Verde National Park to Gallup, New Mexico, on the Navajo 
Reservation, $15,000, said sum to be reimbursed from any funds 
which are now or may hereafter be placed in the Treasury to the 
credit of said Indians: Provided, That such sum shall be expended 
under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior in such manner 
and at such times and places as he may deem proper, and in the 
employment of Indian labor as far as possible for the construction of 
said highway. 

NEW YORK. 

Sec. 15. For fulfilling treaties with Senecas of New York: For per- 
manent annuity in heu of interest on stock (Act of February nme- 
teenth, eighteen hundred and thirty-one), $6,000. 

For fulfilling treaties with Six Nations of New York: For perma- 
nent annuity, in clothing and other useful articles (article six, treaty 
of November eleventh, seventeen hundred and ninety-four), $4,500. 

NORTH CAROLINA. 

Sec. 16. For support and education of one hundred and eighty 
Indian pupils at the Indian school at Cherokee, North Carohna, 
including pay of superintendent, $30,000; for general repairs and 
improvements, $6,000; in all, $36,000. 

NORTH DAKOTA. 

Sec. 17. For support and civilization of the Sioux of Devils Lake, 
North Dakota, including pay of employees, $5,000. 

For support and civilization of Indians at Fort Berthold Agency, 
in North Dakota, including pay of employees, $15,000. 

For support and civilization of Turtle Mountain Band of Chippe- 
was, North Dakota, including pay of employees, $11,000. 

For support and education of one hundred and twenty-five Indian 
pupils at the Indian school, Bismarck, North Dakota, including pay 
of superintendent, $22,175; for general repairs and improvements, 
$4,000; for boys' dormitory, $30,000; in all, $56,175. 

For support and education of four hundred Indian pupils at Fort 
Totten Indian School, Fort Totten, North. Dakota, and for pay of 
superintendent, $68,500; sinking wells and making improvements of 
the water system, $4,000, to be immediately available; for barn, 
$5,000; for general repairs and improvements, $5,000; in all, $82,500. 

For support and education of two hundred and twenty Indian 
pupils at the Indian school, Wahpeton, North Dakota, and pay of 
superintendent, $38,540; for general repaii-s and improvements, 
$5,000; for new school building, $20,000; in all, $63,540. 

The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to withdraw 
from the Treasury of the United States, from time to time, in his 
discretion, all moneys derived from the sale and disposition of surplus 
lands, withui the limits of the former Fort Berthold Indian Reserva- 



(Pub. 80.] 25 

tion, North Dakota, arising under the provisions of the Act approved 
June first, nineteen hundred and ten (Thirty-sixth Statutes at Large, 
page four hundred and fifty-five), together with the accrued interest 
thereon, and distribute the same per capita to the Indians entitled 
thereto in the following manner, to wit: To competent Indians in 
cash share and share alike and to incompetent Indians by depositing 
equal shares to their individual credit in banks bonded and desig- 
nated as depositories for individual Indian moneys, subject to ex- 
penditure for the benefit of the Indians entitled under such rules as 
the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe, and hereafter annual 
distributions shall similarly be made of funds accruing under the 
provisions of the act herein referred to. 

To enable tlie Secretary of the Interior to redeem a mortgage on 
the allotment selection of "Starr McGillis, a Turtle Mountain Chippewa 
Indian, described as the northwest quarter of section thirty-four, 
tow^lship one hundred and sixty-four north, range seventy west of 
the fifth principal meridian. North Dakota, $1,500, or so much 
thereof as may be necessary. 

To enable the Secretary of the Interior to reimburse Benson 
County, North Dakota, for moneys actually paid to the State of 
North Dakota for care and maintenance of insane Indians at the 
State insane asylum, as foUows: Joseph Langer, $457.44; Mary J. 
Pejihutaskana, $410; Alfred Littlewind, $630; in all, $1,497.44. 

For the erection of a headstone to mark the grave of Scarlet Crow, 
a Sioux Indian chief of the Wahpeton Tribe, who was ])uried March 
thirteenth, eighteen hundred and sixty-seven, in the Congressional 
Cemetery, Washington, District of Columbia, in a grave marked 
"76-R. A. 22," $100. 

. OKLAHO^Ll. 

Sec. 18. For support and civilization of the Wichitas and affiliated 
bands who have been collected on the reservations set apart for their 
use and occupation in Oklahoma, including pay of employees, $5,000. 

The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to withdraw 
from the Treasury of the United vStates, at his discretion, the sum of 
$25,000, or so mucli thereof as may be necessary, of the funds on de- 

fosit to the credit of the Kiowa, Comanche, and Apache Tribes of 
ndians in Oklahoma, for the support of the agency and pay of em- 
ployees maintained for their benefit. 

That the Secretary of the Interior be and he is hereby, authorized 
to withdraw from the Treasury of the United States, at his discretion, 
the sum of $250,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, of the 
funds on deposit to the credit of the Kiowa, Comanche, and Apache 
Tribes of Indians in (Oklahoma, and pay out the same for the benefit 
of the members of said tribes for their maintenance and sui)port, and 
improvement of their homesteads, for the ensuing year, in such man- 
ner and under such regulations as he may prescribe: Provided, That 
the Secretary of the Interior sliall report to Congress on the first 
Monday hi Deceiul)er, nineteen hundred and seventeen, a detailed 
statement as to all moneys expended as provicknl for herein. 

For support and civilization of tlie Cheyeunes and Arapahoes who 
have been collected on the reservations set apart for their use and 
occupation in Oklahoma, including pay of employees, $35,000. 



26 [Pub. sai 

For support and civilization of the Kansas Indians, Oklahoma, in- 
cluding pay of employees, $1,500. 

For support and civilization of the Kickapoo Indians in Oklahoma, 
including pay of employees, $2,000. 

For support and civilization of the Ponca Indians in Oklahoma 
and Nebraska, including pay of employees, $8,000. 

For support and education of five hundred Indian pupils at the 
Indian school at Chilocco, Oklahoma, including pay of superintendent, 
$86,250; for general repairs and improvements, $7,000; in all, 
$93,250. 

For fulfilling treaties with Pawnees, Oklahoma: For perpetual an- 
nuity, to be paid in cash to the Pawnees (article three, agreement of 
November twenty-third, eighteen hundred and ninety-two), $30,000; 
for support of two manual labor schools (article three, treaty of Sep- 
tember twenty-fourth, eighteen hundred and fifty-seven), $10,000; 
for pay of one farmer, two blacksmiths, one miller, one engineer and 
apprentices, and two teachers (article four, same treaty), $5,400; 
for purchase of iron and steel and other necessaries for the shops 
(article four, same treaty) , $500 ; for pay of physician and purchase 
of medicines, $1,200; in all, $47,100. 

For support of Quapaws, Oklahoma: For education (article three, 
treaty of May thirteenth, eighteen hundred and thirty- three) , $1,000; 
for blacksmith and assistants, and tools, iron, and steel for black- 
smith shop (same article and treaty), $500; in all, $1,500: Provided, 
That the President of the United States shall certify the same to be 
for the best interests of the Indians. 

That the unexpended balance of $9,533.38 is hereby reappropri- 
ated and made available for continuing the relief and settlement of 
the Apache Indians formerly confined as prisoners of war on the 
Fort Sill Military Reservation, Oklahoma, for the purchase of allot- 
ments in Oklahoma, as provided for in the Act of June thirtieth, 
nineteen hundred and thirteen (Thirty-eight Statutes at Large, 
page seventy-seven), for the three adult heads of families who have 
not heretofore received allotments. 

That the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe Railway Company be, 
and is hereby, authorized to reconstruct its line of railroad through 
the Chilocco Indian School Reservation in the State of Oklahoma to 
eliminate, where necessary, existing heavy grades and curves, and 
for such purpose to acquire the necessary right of way, not exceedbig 
two hundred feet in width, subject to the approval of the Secretary 
of the Interior and to the payment for the land so taken and occu- 
pied by such new right of way of such an amount as may be deter- 
mined by the Secretary of the Interior to be fair and adequate com- 
pensation therefor, including aU damage which may be caused by 
the reconstruction of said line of railroad to adjoining lands, crops, 
and other hnprovements, said amount to be paid to the Secretary of 
the Interior for the use and benefit of the Chilocco Indian School. 

FIVE CIVILIZED TRIBES. 

Sec. 19. For expenses of administration of the affairs of the Five 
Civilized Tribes, Oklahoma, and the compensation of employees, 
$185,000, of which $10,000 shall be immediately available. 



tPuB. 80.] 27 

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized 
to pay to the enrolled members of the Choctaw and Chickasaw 
Trioes of Indians of Oldahoma entitled under existing law to share 
in the funds of said tribes, or to their la\vful heirs, out of any moneys 
belonging to said tribes in the United States Treasury or deposited 
in any bank or held by any official under the jurisdiction of the 
Secretary of the Interior, not to exceed $300 per capita, in the case 
of the Clioctaws, and S200 per capita in the case of the Chickasaws, 
said payment to be made under such rules and regulations as the 
Secretary of the Interior may prescribe: Provided, That in cases 
where such enrolled members, or their heirs, are Indians who by 
reason of their degree of Indian blood belong to the restricted class, 
the Secretary of the Interior may, in his discretion, withhold such 
payments and use the same for the benefit of such restricted Indians: 
Provided further, That the money paid to the enrolled members as 
provided herein shall be exempt from any lien for attorne3's' fees 
or other debt contracted prior to the passage of this Act except that 
the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized within thirty days 
after the passage of this Act, to investigate claims not to exceed 
$1,950 growing out of contracts alleged to be in existence between 
John Calvin Gray, William T. Lancaster, Arthur Jennings and 
Clyde Jennings, as enrolled members of the Choctaw or Chickasaw 
Nations, and Henry W. Blair, Kappler and Merillat, James K. Jones, 
Charles M. Fechheimer and Eugene Hamilton, as attorneys, and in 
case such claims are found to be valid and the contracts approved 
in accordance with existing law, the said Secretary of the Interior 
may, in his discretion apply any amounts that may be found due 
under this paragraph to the aforesaid enrolled members of the 
Choctaw or Chickasaw Nations to the payment of such fee, but the 
amounts due hereunder to other enrolled members of the Choctaw 
and Chickasaw Nations shall not be held in abeyance to this claim 
but shall be paid promptly without reference to same: Provided 
further, That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to 
use not to exceed $8,000 out of the Chickasaw and Choctaw Tribal 
funds for the expenses and the compensation of all necessary em- 
ployees for the distribution of the said per capita payments. That 
the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hercDy, authorized to i)ay 
to the enrolled members of the Seminole Tribe of Indians of Olda- 
homa entitled under existing law to share in the funds of said tribe, 
or to their lawful heirs, out of any moneys belonging to said tribe 
m the United States Treasury or dopositod in any bank or held by 
any official under the jurisdiction of the Secretary of the Interior, 
$300 per capita: Provided, That said payment shall be made under 
such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may 

Erescribe: Provided further, That in cases where such enrolled mem- 
ers or their heirs are Indians who belong to the restricted class, the 
Secretary of the Interior may, in his discretion, withhold such 
and use the same for the benefit of such restricted IiuHans: 



\ovided further, That the money paid to the enrolled members or 
their lieirs as provided herein shall be exempt from any lien for 
attorneys' fees or other debt contracted prior to the passage of tliis 
Act. Ihere is hereby appropriated a sum not to exceed $2,000 out 
of the funds of said Semmole Tribe for the payment of salaries and 
other expenses of said per capita payment or payments. 



28 |PUB. 80.) 

For salaries and expenses of such attorneys and other employees as 
the Secretary of the Interior may, in his discretion, deem necessary in 
probate matters affecting allottees or their heirs in the Five Civilized 
Tribes and in the several tribes of the Quapaw Agency, and for the 
costs and other necessary expenses incident to suits instituted or con- 
ducted by such attorneys, $85,000. 

For the support, continuance, and maintenance of the Cherokee 
Orphan Training School, near Tahlequah, Oklahoma, for the orphan 
Indian children of the Five Civilized Tribes belonging to the restricted 
class, to be conducted as an industrial school under the direction of 
the Secretary of the Interior, including repairs and improvements, 
$40,000: Provided, That the unexpended balance of $7,500 appropri- 
ated by the Act of August first, nineteen hundred and fourteen, is 
hereby reappropriated for the purchase of additional land, not to 
exceed sixty acres. 

The sum of $275,000, to be expended in the discretion of the Secre- 
tary of the Interior, under rules and regulations to be prescribed by 
him, in aid of the common schools in the Cherokee, Creek, Choctaw, 
Chickasaw, and Seminole Nations and the Quapaw Agency in Okla- 
homa, during the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, nineteen hundred 
and seventeen: Provided, That this appropriation shall not be subject 
to the limitation in section one of this Act limiting the expenditure of 
money to educate children of less than one-fourth Indian blood. 

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized 
to use not exceeding $35,000 of the proceeds of sales of unallotted 
lands and other tribal property belonging to any of the Five Civilized 
Tribes for payment of salaries of employees and other expenses of 
advertising and sale in connection with the further sales of such tribal 
lands and property, including the advertising and sale of the land 
within the segregated coal and asphalt area of the Choctaw and 
Chickasaw Nations, or of the surface thereof as provided for in the 
Act of Congress approved February nineteenth, nineteen hundred and 
twelve (Thirty-seventh United States Statutes at Large, page sixty- 
seven), and of the improvements thereon, which is hereby expressly 
authorized, and for other work necessary to a final settlement of the 
affairs of the Five Civilized Tribes: Provided, That not to exceed 
$10,000 of such amount may be used in connection with the collection 
of rents of unallotted lands and tribal buildings: Provided fvrtJier, 
That during the fiscal year ending June thirtieth, nineteen hundred 
and seventeen, no moneys shall be expended from tribal funds belong- 
ing to the Five Civilized Tribes without specific appropriation by 
Congress, except as follows : Equalization of allotments, per capita and 
other payments authorized by law to individual members of the 
respective tribes, tribal and other Indian schools for the current fiscal 
year under existing law, salaries and contingent expenses of governors, 
chiefs, assistant chiefs, secretaries, interpreters, and mining trustees 
of the tribes for the current fiscal year at salaries at the rate heretofore 

Eaid, and attorneys for said tribes employed under contract approved 
y the President, under existing law, for the current fiscal year: 
Provided further, That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby author- 
ized to pay the cost of maintenance during the current fiscal year of 
the tribal and other schools and to continue during the ensuing fiscal 
year the tribal and other schools among the Choctaw, Chickasaw, 
Creek, and Seminole Tribes from the tribal funds of those nations, 



(Pub. 80.] 29 



witliiii his discretion and under such rules and regulations as he may 
prescribe: And provided fiirtlicr, That the Secretary of the Interior is 
hereby empowered, during the fiscal year endino; June thirtieth, nine- 
teen hundred and seventeen, to expend funds of the Chickasaw, 
Choctaw, Creek, and Seminole Nations available for school purposes 
under existing law for such repairs, improvements, or new buildings 
as he may deem essential for the proper conduct of the several schools 
of said tribes. 

For fulfilling treaties with Choctaws, Oklahoma: For permanent 
aimuity (article two, treaty of November sixteenth, eighteen hundred 
and five, and article thirteen, treaty of June twenty-second, eighteen 
Imndred and fifty-five), -13,000 ; for permanent annuity for support of 
light-horsemen (article thirteen, treaty of October eighteenth, eighteen 
hundred and twenty, and article thirteen, treaty of June twenty- 
second, eighteen hundred and fifty-five), $600; for permanent an- 
nuity for support of blacksmith (article six, treaty of October 
eighteenth, eighteen hundred and twenty, and article nine, treaty of 
January twentieth, eighteen hundred and twenty-five, and article 
thirteen, treaty of June twenty-second, eighteen hundred and fifty- 
five, $600: for permanent annuity for education (article two, treaty 
of January twentieth, eighteen liundred and twenty-five, and article 
thirteen, treaty of June twenty-second, eighteen hundred and fifty- 
five), $6,000: for permanent annuity for iron and steel (article nine, 
treaty of January twentieth, eighteen Imndred and twenty-five, and 
article thirteen, treaty of June twenty-second, eighteen hundred and 
fifty-five), $320: in atl, $10,520. 

For the salaries and expenses of not to exceed six oil and gas 
inspectors, under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior, to 
supervise oil and gas mining operations on allotted lands leased by 
members of the Five Civilized Tribes from which restrictions have not 
been removed, and to conduct investigations \Ai\\ a view to the pre- 
vention of waste. $15,000. 

That the Secretary of tlie Interior is hereby authorized to acquire 
on behalf of the Choctaw Nation, Oklahoma, by purchase or other- 
wise, such lands or easements as shall be necessary for the purpose of 
a roadway leading from Whcelock Academy, Choctaw Nation, Okla- 
homa, to the public higliway, and to expend therefor not to exceed 
$150, from Choctaw tribal funds. 

That tlie Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized 
to effectuate a compromise settlement of the suit of the United States 
against E. Dowden and others decided adversely to the Government 
on January fourth, nineteen hundred and fifteen, by tlie United States 
Circuit Court of Appeals for tlie I^^ighth Circuit and now pending on 
appeal in the Sujireme Court of the United States, and for said purpose 
to purchase whatever right, title, and interest that said E. Dowden 
may have in or to the land involved in said suit, said land being 
situated witiiin the area segregated for town-site purposes at Tuttle 
Oklalioma. and to take such otiier action as may be necessary to quiet 
the title in the Ciioctaw and (-liickasaw Nations to said land and in 
the purchasers from said nations at the Government sale of tlie town 
lots, and for the above purpose the sum of $57,500, together with 
interest thereon at tlie rate of six ])er centum per annum from Feb- 
ruary twenty-fourth, nineteen hundred and sixteen, to date of settle- 
ment, is hereby appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury of 



30 [Pub. 80.J 

the United States not otherwise appropriated: Provided, That the 
United States is to be reimbursed to the extent of the proceeds here- 
tofore derived, or which may hereafter be derived, from the sale of 
the town lots within the area affected by such compromise settlement. 

OREGON. 

Sec. 20. For support and civilization of Indians of the Klamath 
Agency, Oregon, including pay of employees, $6,000. 

For support and civilization of the confederated tribes and bands, 
under Warm Springs Agency, Oregon, including pay of employees, 
$4,000. 

For support and civilization of the Indians of the Umatilla Agency, 
Oregon, including pay of emploj^ees, $3,000. 

For support and education of six hundred Indian pupils, including 
native Indian pupils brought from Alaska, at the Indian school, 
Salem, Oregon, including pay of superintendent, $102,000; for gen- 
eral repairs and improvements, $12,000; for remodeling sewer sys- 
tem, $5,000; for three high-pressure steam boilers, $7,200: Provided, 
That the unused balance of $9,830 of the amount appropriated by 
the Act of August first, nineteen hundred and fourteen (Thirty-eighth 
Statutes at Large, page six hundred and two), and an additional 
amount of $2,500 may be expended for an addition to the assembly 
hall; in all, $128,700. - 

For support and civilization of Indians at Grande Ronde and Siletz 
Agencies, Oregon, including pay of employees, $4,000: Provided, 
That section three of an Act entitled "An Act to authorize the sale 
of certain lands belonging to the Indians of the Siletz Indian Reserva- 
tion in the State of Oregon," approved May thirteenth, nineteen 
hundred and ten, be, and the same is hereby, amended by striking 
out all of said section and inserting in lieu thereof the following: 

"Sec. 3. That when such lands are surveyed and platted, they 
shall be appraised and sold, except land reserved for water-power 
sites as provided in section two of this Act, under the provisions of 
the Revised Statutes covering the sale of town sites located on the 

Eublic domain. That the proceeds derived from the sale of any lands 
ereunder, after reimbursing the United States for the expense 
incurred in carrying out the provisions of this Act, shall be paid, 
share and share alike, to the enrolled members of the tribe." 

For construction, maintenance, and operation of the Modoc Point 
irrigation system within the Klamath Indian Reservation, in the 
State of Oregon, $20,000, reimbursable in accordance with the pro- 
visions of the Act of March third, nineteen hundred and eleven: Pro- 
vided, That the limit of cost of said project fixed by the Act of August 
twenty-fourth, nineteen hundred and twelve, is hereby changed from 
$155,000 to $170,000. 

That the sum of $1,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, 
of the tribal funds of the IQamath Indians of the State of Oregon, is 
hereby appro])riated to pay the actual expenses of the two delegates 
of the said tribe who have been elected by the general council of the 
Klamath Indians to attend to the business of the tribe and pay tlieir 
expenses to Washington in February and March, nineteen hundred 
and sixteen, to present the affairs of the said Klamath Indians of the 
State of Oregon to the officials of the United States. 



[Pub. 80.] 31 

The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to withdraw 
from the Treasury of the United States the sum of $3,000, or so much 
thereof as may be necessary, of the funds on deposit to the credit of 
the Klamath Indians of the State of Oregon, and use the same for the 
construction of a bridge across the Wilhamson River, on the Klamath 
Indian Reservation, Oregon, under such rules and regulations as he 
may prescribe. 

For the construction of two bridges on the UmatiUa Indian Reser- 
vation, in Oregon, suitable for .wagon and other purposes, across the 
UmatiUa River, at a hmit of cost of $28,000, the first at or near Thorn 
Hollow Station, the second at or near Mission Station, the sum of 
$18,666 is hereby appropriated to be expended under the direction 
of the Secretary of the Interior and to be reimbursable from any 
funds now or hereafter placed in the Treasury to the credit of said 
Indians: Provided, That no part of the money herein appropriated 
shall be expended until the Secretary of the Interior shall have 
obtained from the proper authorities of the State of Oregon, or from 
the county of Umatilla, at least one-third of the cost of said bridges, 
and that the proper authorities of the said State of Oregon or the said 
count}^ of Umatilla shall assume full responsibility for, and agree at 
all times to maintain and repair, said bridges and construct and 
maintain the approaches thereto: Provided, furtlier, That any and 
all expenses above the amount herein named in connection with the 
building and maintenance of said bridges shall be borne by the said 
State 01 Oregon or the said county of Umatilla. 

^PENNSYLVANIA. 

Sec. 21. For support and education of Indian pupils at the Indian 
school at Carlisle, Pennsylvania, including pay of superintendent, 
$132,000; for general repairs and improvements, $20,000; in all, 
$152,000. 

SOUTH DAKOTA. 

Sec. 22. For support and education of three hundred and sixty- 
five Indian pupils at the Indian scliool at Flandreau, South Dakota, 
and for pay of superintendent, $61,500; for general repairs and im- 
provements, $6,000: in all, $67,500: Provided, Tliat the unoxpended 
balance of $1,607.44 aj)propriated by the Act approved August first, 
nineteen hundred and fourteen, for repairing buildings and replacing 
equipment destroyed or damaged by the tornado of June tenth, 
nineteen hundnKl and fourteen, at Flan(h"eau Indian School, South 
Dakota, is hereby r(!ai)propriated and niachi imnicHhately available 
for the purchase and installation of a water tank and the purchase of 
dairy cattle for said school. 

For support and education of two hundred and fifty Indian pupils 
at the Indian school at Pierre, South Dakota, including pay of super- 
intendent, $43,750; for general repairs and improvements, $6,000; 
for steel water tank, $2,000; for new boilers and installation thereof, 
$3,000; for addition to shop building, $1,000; for- barn, $5,000; in 
all $60,750. 

For support and education of two hundred and fifty Indian pupils 
at the Indian school, Rapid City, South Dakota, including pay of 



32 [Pub. sa] 

superintendent, $48,500; for general repairs and improvements, 
$5,000; for new school building, $30,000; in all, $83,500. 

For support of Sioux of different tribes, including Santee Sioux of 
Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota : For pay of five teachers, 
one physician, one carpenter, one miller, one engineer, two farmers, 
and one blacksmith (article thirteen, treaty of April twenty-ninth, 
eighteen hundred and sixty-eight), $10,400; for pay of second black- 
smith, and furnishing iron, steel, and other material (article eight of 
same treaty), $1,600; for pay of additional employees at the several 
agencies for the Sioux in Nebraska, North Dakota, and South Dakota, 
$95,000: for subsistence of the Sioux, other than the Rosebud, Chey- 
enne River, and Standing Rock Tribes, and for purposes of their 
civihzation (Act of February twenty-eighth, eighteen hundred and 
seventy-seven), $200,000: Provided, That this sum shall include trans- 
portation of supplies from the termination of raih'oad or steamboat 
transportation, and in this service Indians shall be employed whenever 
practicable; in all, $307,000. 

For support and maintenance of day and industrial schools among 
the Sioux Indians, including the erection and repairs of school build- 
ings, $200,000, in accordance with the provisions of article five of the 
agreement made and entered into September twenty-sixth, eighteen 
hundred and seventy-six, and ratified February twenty-eighth, eight- 
een hundred and seventy-seven (Nineteenth Statutes, page two hun- 
dred and fifty-four). 

The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and directed to 
cause investigation to be made as to the probable cost of providing 
on the various Sioux Indian Reservations adequate school facilities 
for the children of the Sioux Tribes who are now without Government 
or public school facihties on the respective reservations, and to make 
a report thereof to Congress on or before the first Monday in January, 
nineteen hun(h*ed and seventeen, together with a complete and 
detailed statement of the per capita cost per annum, including mile- 
age paid, now expended for the education of the Sioux Indian chil- 
dren in all the schools, whether on or off the respective reservations, 
and there is hereby appropriated for the expense of such investiga- 
tion and report the sum of $1,000, or so much thereof as may be 
necessary, to be immediately available. 

For subsistence and civilization of the Yankton Sioux, South 
Dakota, including pay of employees, $14,000. 

For the equipment and maintenance of the asylum for insane 
Indians at Canton, South Dakota, for incidental and all other expenses 
necessary for its proper conduct and management, including pay of 
employees, repairs, improvements, and for necessary expense of trans- 
porting insane Indians to and from said asylum, $45,000. 

For a proportionate share of the amount required to construct a 
wagon road or highway through the Standing Rock Indian Reserva- 
tion in Corson County, vSouth Dakota, from a point on the Missouri 
River north of Pontis, South Dakota, thence in a northwesterly direc- 
tion to the town of Tatanka, the sum of $5,000, in accordance with 
the report of the Secretary of the Interior of December seventh, nine- 
teen hundred and fourteen, made in pursuance of the provisions of 
section twenty of the Act entitled "An Act making appropriations 
for the current ^nd contingent expenses of the Bureau of Indian 
Affaii-s, for fulfilling treaty stipulations with various Indian tribes, 



[Pun. 80 33 

and for other purposes, for the fiscal year ending June tliirtietli, nine- 
teen liuiidred and fifteen," approved August fii'st, nineteen hundred 
and fourteen: Provided, Tliat such sum sliall be expended under tho 
direction of the Secretary of the Interior in sucli manner and at such 
times as he may deem proper, in the employment of Indian labor for 
the construction of said road or highway, and that the same shall be 
reimbursable from the Standing Rock Reservation three per centum 
fund under the Act of February fourteenth, nineteen hundred and 
thirteen (Thirty-seventh Statutes at Large, page six hundred and 
seventy-five). 

UTAH. 

Sec. 23. For support and civilization of Confederated Bands of 
Utes: For pay of two carpenters, two millers, two farmers, and two 
blacksmiths (article fifteen, treaty of March second, eighteen hun- 
dred and sixty-eight), $6,720; for pay of two teachers (same article 
and treaty), SI, 800; for purchase of iron and steel and the necessary 
tools for blacksmith shop (article nine, same treaty), $220; for 
annual amount for the purchase of beef, mutton, wheat, flour, beans, 
and potatoes, or other necessary articles of food and clothing, and 
farming equipment (article twelve, same treaty), $30,000; for pay 
of employees at the several Ute agencies, $15,000; in all, $53,740. 

For the support and civilization of detached Indians in Utah, 
includmg pay of employees, $10,000. 

The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to withdraw 
from the Treasury of the United States," witliin his discretion, the sum 
of $300,000 of the principal funds to the credit of the Confederated 
Bands of Ute Indians and to expend the sum of $50,000 of said 
amount for the benefit of the Ute Mountain (formerly Navajo Springs) 
Band of said Indians in Colorado, and the sum of $200,000 of said 
amount for the Uintah, White River, and Uncompahgre Bands of 
Ute Indians in Utah, and the sum of $50,000 of said amount for the 
Southern Ute Indians in Colorado, which sums shall be charged to 
said bands, and the Secretary of the Interior is also authorized to 
^vithdraw from the Treasury the accrued interest to and including 
June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and sixteen, on the funds of the 
said Confederated Bands of Ute Indians appropriated under the 
Act of March fourth, nineteen hundred and thirteen (Thirty-seventh 
Statutes at Large, page nine hundred and thirty-four), and to expend 
or distribute the same for the purpose of promoting civihzation and 
self-support among the said Indians, under such regulations as tho 
Secretary of the Interior may prescribe: Provided, That the Secre- 
tary of the Interior shall rc]:)ort to Congress, on the first Monday in 
December, nineteen hundred and seventeen, a detailed statement 
as to aU moneys expended as provided for herein. 

To carry into effect tho provision of article nine of the treaty of 
March second, eiglitecn liundred and sixty-eight (Fifteenth wStatutcs 
at Large, page six hundred and nineteen), wdtii tho ConfedcratcMl 
Bands of Ute Indians, for furuisiiing seeds and agricultural imple- 
ments, the sum of $10,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary. 

For a proportionate share of the amount required to construct an 
interstate wagon road or highway through the Kaibab Indian Reser- 
vation, Utah, the sum of $9,000: Provided, That such sum shall be 
Pub. No. 80 3 



34 [Pub. 80.] 

expended under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior in such 
manner and at such times as he may deem proper in the emplo^anent 
of Indian hibor for the construction of said road or highway, reim- 
bursable out of any funds now or hereafter placed to the credit of 
said Indians in the Treasury of the United States. 

For continuing the construction of lateral distributing systems to 
irrigate the allotted lands of the Uncompahgre, Uintah, and White 
River Utes, in Utah, and to maintain existing irrigation systems, 
authorized under the Act of June twenty-first, nineteen hundred and 
six, reimbursable as therein provided, $40,000, to remain available 
until expended. 

To reimburse the board of education of Box Elder County, State 
of Utah, for education of twenty-three Indian pupils at the Washakie 
School, Box Elder County, during the school year of nineteen hun- 
dred and thirteen and nineteen hundred and fourteen, and for the 
education of twenty-one Indian pupils at the same school during 
the school year of nineteen hundred and fourteen and nineteen 
hundred and fifteen, SI, 684. 

For the education of twenty-two Indian pupils at the Indian school 
at Washakie, Box Elder County, for the school year nineteen hundred 
and fifteen and nineteen hundred and sixteen, or so much thereof as 
may be necessary, $832. 

Tlie Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to withdraw 
from the Treasury of the United States the sum of $1,000, or so much 
thereof as may be necessary, of the funds on deposit to the credit 
of the Uintah Tribe of Indians, in the State of Utah, and to use the 
same to protect the north abutment of the Government bridge at 
Myton, Utah, under such rules and regulations as he may prescribe, 
said sum to be immediately available. 

WASHINGTON. 

Sec. 24. For support and civiHzation of the D'Wamish and other 
alhed tribes in Washington, including pay of employees, $7,000. 

For support and civiHzation of the Makahs, including pay of 
employees, $2,000. 

For support and civiHzation of Qui-nai-elts and Quil-leh-utes, 
including pay of employees, $1,000. 

For support and civilization of Indians at Yakima Agency, includmg 
pay of employees, $3,000. 

For support and civilization of Indians at ColviUe, Taholah, Puy- 
allup, and Spokane Agencies, including pay of employees, and for 
purchase of agricultural implements, and support and civilization of 
Joseph's Band of Ncz Perce Indians in Washington, $13,000. 

For support of Spokanes in Washington (article six of agreement 
with said Indians, dated March eighteenth, eighteen hundred and 
eighty-seven, ratified by Act of July thirteenth, eighteen hundred and 
ninety-two), $1,000. 

For operation and maintenance of the irrigation system on lands 
allotted to Yakima Indians in Washington, $15,000, reimbursable in 
accordance with the provisions of the Act of March first, nineteen 
hundred and seven: Provided, That money received under agree- 
ments for temporary water supply may be expended under the direc- 
tion of the Secretary of the Interior for mamtenance and improve- 
ment of the irrigation system on said lands. 



PfB. 80.! 35 

For support and oclucation of tlircc hundred and fifty Indian pupils 
at the Cushman Indian School, Tacoma, Washington, including 
repairs and improvements, and for pay of superintendent, !B50,000, 
said appropriation being made to supplement the PuyaUup school 
funds used for said school. 

For construction of a dam across the Yakima Ilivcr for the diversion 
and utilization of water provided for forty acres of each Indian allot- 
ment on the Yakima Reservation, Washington, and such other water 
supply as may be available or obtainable for the irrigation of a total 
of one hundred and twenty thousand acres of allotted Indian land on 
said reservation, and for beginning the enlargement and extension of 
the distribution and drainage system on said reservation, $200,000, 
to be immediately available and to remain available until expended: 
Provided, That the cost of the entire diversion works and distribution 
and drainage system shall be reimbursed to the United States by the 
o^\^lers of the lands irrigable thereunder in not to exceed twenty 
annual payments, and the Secretary of the Interior may fix operation 
and maintenance charges, which shall be paid as he may direct. 

In the apportionment of charges against Indians, due allowance shall 
be made for such amounts as may have been repaid the United States 
on account of reimbursable appropriations heretofore made for this 
project, and for the construction of the irrigation system prior to the 
passage of the Act of December twenty-first, nineteen hundred and 
four (Thirty-third Statutes at Large, page five hundred and ninety- 
five), as therein provided. All charges against Indian aUottees 
herein authorized unless otherwise paid may be paid from individual 
shares in the tribal fund when the same is available for distribution, 
and if any allottee shall receive patent in fee to his allotment before 
the amount so charged against him has been paid to the United States, 
then such amount remaining unpaid shall be and become a lien upon 
his allotment, and the fact of such lien shall be recited in such patent 
and may be enforced by the Secretary of the Interior by foreclosure 
as a mortgage, and should any Indian sell any part of his allotment 
with the approval of the Secretary of the Interior, the amount of any 
unpaid charges against the land sold shall be and becomes a first lien 
thereon and may be enforced by Secretary of the Interior by fore- 
closure as a mortgage, and delivery of water to such land may be 
refused within the discretion of the Secretary of the Interior until aU 
dues are paid: Provided further, That no right to water or to the use 
of any irrigation ditch or other structure on said reservation shall 
vest or be allowed until the owner of the land to be irrigated as herein 
provided shall comply with such rules and regulations as the Secretary 
of the Interior may prescribe, and he is hereby authorized to prescribe 
such rules and regulations as he may determine proper for making 
effective the foregoing provisions, and to require of owners of lands 
in fee such security for the reimbursement herein required as he may 
determine necessary, and to refuse delivery of water to any tract of 
land until the owners thereof shall have complied therewith. 

For the third installment in pa>Tnont of $635,000 for water supply 
for irrigation of forty acres of each Indian allotment on the Yakima 
Indian Jlesorvation irrigation system in the State of Washington, 
])ro^^ded bv the Act of August lirst, nineteen luuidred and fourteen 
(Tliirty-eighth Statutes at Large, page six liundrcd and four), 
$100,000 to be covered into the reclamation fund. 



36 iPuB. 80. i 

That tho Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, aiitliorized 
to patent to the Washington State Historical Society, for memorial 
and park purposes, the following-described lands in tho diminished 
Colville Indian Reservation, in the State of Washington, to wit: A 
tract of land not exceeding four acres in area located in the northwest 
corner of lot two of section seventeen, the precise description of said 
tract to bo determined by said Washington Historical Society and 
the Secretary of the Interior prior to the issuance of the patent 
therefor, and lot seven, containing twenty and ninety one-hun- 
drcdths acres of section twenty-one, all in township thirty north, 
range twenty-five east of the Willamette meiidian, m Washington: 
Provided, That the lands hereby granted shall be paid for by the 
said society at their appraised value, to be ascertained in such man- 
ner as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe, and the proceeds 
thereof placed in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of 
the Indians belonging on the reservation of which the lands herein 
desciibed are a part : Provided further, That the lands hereby granted 
shall be subject for a period of twenty-five years to all the laws of 
the United States prohibiting the introduction of intoxicants into 
the Indian country. 

That the Secretary of the Interior bo, and he hereby is, autliorized 
to sell and dispose of not to exceed twenty acres of that portion of 
the lands situated on the north side of and within the limits of the 
abandoned Fort Spokane Military Reservation, State of Washington, 
not necessary for hospital purposes, as provided for in the Act ap- 
proved August fh'st, nineteen hundred and fourteen (Thirty-eighth 
Statutes at Large, page five hundred and eiglity-f our) , at not less 
than the appraised value thereof, and to place the proceeds thereof 
in the Treasury of the United States to the credit of the Spokane In- 
dians in said State. 

That there be, and hereby is, granted to school district numbered 
fifty-six, Klickitat County, Washington, the northwest quarter of the 
noithwest quarter of the northeast quarter of the northeast quarter 
of section eleven, township six north, range fourteen east of the 
Willamette meridian, containing two and one-half acres, now used 
as a public school site by said district, and being a part of the Yakima 
Indian Reservation, and the Secretary of the Interior is authorized 
to issue patent to said district for said lands, the same to be used 
for school purposes. 

That tho Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized 
to make an allotment of not more than eighty acres of land -within 
tho diminished Colville Indian Reservation in the State of Washing- 
ton to Se-cum-ka-nullax in lieu of a portion of the Moses agreement 
allotment numbered thirty-six embraced witliin the homestead entry 
of Charles M. Hickerson. 

That the Secretary of the Interior be, and he is hereby, authorized 
and directed to accept the homestead proof submitted by Charles M. 
Hickerson for that part of his homestead embraced within allotment 
numbered thirty-six to Se-cum-ka-nullax, of Chief Moses's Band of 
Indians, if the same is shown to be in compliance with the homestead 
laws, and the title of said Indian to that part of said allotment em- 
braced within said entry is hereby extinguished. 

The Secretary of the Interior is authorized and directed to lease 
to citizens of the United States for mining purposes unallotted 



iPuB. 80. 37 

minoriiA lands on the diminished Spokane Reservation in the State of 
Wa-^hingtoii for periods of twenty-five years with privih^g(>s of re- 
newal, on such reasonable renewal conditions as may he determined 
by the Secretary of the Interior, and also \vith reasonable conditions 
to be fixed by the Secretary of the Interior providing for the prose- 
cution of mining development and operation. Such leases shall be 
made to applicants in the order in which applications shall be made. 
Free opportunity shall bo given for prospecting of the said lands, and 
rental shall be based upon mining production, and shall be reasona})le, 
and the proceeds of rental shall bo paid into the Spokane Indian 
tribal fund. 

That there is hereby appropriated, out of any funds in the Treasury 
not otherwise appropriated, $95,000, to be used by the Commissioner 
of Indian Affairs under the direction of the Secretary of the Interior, 
in the accpiisition of water rights for the lands heretofore allotted to 
Indians, situated within the boundaries of the West Okanogan 
Valley irrigation district, Okanogan County, Washington, and for the 
payment of the proportionate operation and maintenance charges of 
the said district. The Secretary of the Interior is authorized to ne- 
gotiate for said water rights and to pay therefor as he may deem 
appropriate, such part of the sum herein appropriated as he may 
determine to be necessary for the best interests of the Indians: Pro- 
vided, Tliat nothing hereni contained shall be construed to authorize 
any hen or claims upon or against said allotted lands not herein 
specifically appropriated for: Provided further, That the amounts ex- 
pended mider this appropriation shall be reimbursed to the United 
States by the owners of the land on behah of which such expenditure 
is made, upon such terms as the Secretary may prescribe, which 
shall be not less favorable to the Indians than the reimbursement 
required of settlers upon lands irrigated under the provisions of the 
Reclamation Act of June seventeenth, nineteen hundred and two 
(Thirty-second Statutes at Large, page three hundred and eighty- 
eight), and Acts amendatory thereof or supplementary thereto; and 
if any Indian shall sell his allotment or part thereof, or receive a 
patent in fee for the same, any amount oi the charge maelc to secure 
reimbursement remaining unpaid at the time of such sale or issuance 
of ])atent shall be a lien on the land, and patents issued therefor 
shall recite the amount of such item. 

WISCONSIN. 

Sec. 25. For the support and echication of two hundred and fifty 
Indian pupils at the Indian school at llayward, Wisconsin, including 
pay of superintendent, $43, .'^50; for general repairs and imj)rove- 
ments, $5,000; for dairy barn, .$3,200; in all, $51,550. 

For support and education of two hundred and seventy-five Indian 
pupils at the Indian school, Tomah, Wisconsin, including pay of 
superintendent, $47,625; for general repairs and improvements, 
$6,000; for installing electric dynamo and switchboard for a li<^hting 
plant, $2,.500; in all, $.56,125. 

For sup])ort and civiHzation of th(> Chippcwas of Lake Sujierior, 
Wisconsin, including pav of employees, $7,000. 

For support, education, and civilization of (lie Pottawatomie 
Indians who reside in the State of Wisconsin, nicluding pa}^ of employ- 
ees, $7,000. 



38 |PUB. so.] 

There is hereby appropriated the sum of $95,000, to he used in 
addition to the tribal funds of the Stockbridge and Munsee Tribes 
of Indians, for the payment of the members of the Stockbridge and 
Munsee Tribes of Indians who were enrolled under the Act of Con- 
gress of March third, eighteen hundred and ninety-three, equal 
amounts to the amounts paid to the other members of said tribe 
prior to the enrollment under said Act, and such payments sliall be 
made upon the certificate and order of the Commissioner of Indian 
Affairs upon claims being filed with him, showing to his satisfaction 
that siich claimants, or the ancestors of such claimants, were enrolled 
under the Act of March third, eighteen hundred and ninety-three, 
entitled, "An Act for the relief of the Stockbridge and Munsee Tribes 
of Indians of the State of Wisconsin." 

For the purchase of pure bred dairy cattle for the Oneida Indian 
School, Wisconsin, $5,000. 

For the support and civilization of those portions of the Wisconsin 
Band of Pottawatomie Indians residing in the States of Wisconsin 
and Michigan, and to aid said Indians in establishing homes on the 
lands purchased for them under the provisions of the Act of Congress 
approved June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and thirteen, $100,000, 
or so much thereof as may be necessary, said sum to be reimbursed 
to the United States out of the appropriation, when made, of the 
principal due as the proportionate share of said Indians in annuities 
and moneys of the Pottawatomie Tribe in which they have not 
shared, as set forth in House Document Numbered Eight hundred 
and thirty (Sixtieth Congress, first session), and the Secretary of the 
Interior is hereby authorized to expend the said sum of $100,000 in 
the clearing of land and the purchase of houses, building material, 
seed, animals, machinery, tools, implements, and other equipment 
and supplies necessary to enable said Indians to become self-support- 
ing: Provided^ That in order to train said Indians in the use and 
handling of money, not exceeding $25,000 of the above appropria- 
tion may be paid to them per capita, or be deposited to their credit 
subject to expenditure in such manner and under such rules and 
regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe. 

The Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized to withdraw 
from the Treasury of the United States, in his discretion, the sum of 
$300,000, or so much thereof as may be necessary, of the tribal funds 
of the Menominee Indians in Wisconsin, arising under the provisions 
of the Acts of June twelfth, eighteen hundred and ninety (Twenty- 
sixth Statutes at Large, page one hundred and forty-six), and March 
twenty-eighth, nineteen hundred and eight (Thirty-fifth Statutes at 
Large, page fifty-one), and to expend the same in the clearing of 
land, the erection of sanitary homes, and the purchase of building 
material, seed, teams, farming equipment, dairy stock, machinery, 
tools, implements, and other equipment and suj^plies necessary to 
enable said Indians to become self-supporting under such regulations 
as he may prescribe: Provided, That no lands shall be cleared for 
agricultural purposes, pursuant to the foregoing provision, excepting 
such lands as liave Ix'en heretofore completely and wholly cut over. 

Section three of the Act of March twenty-eighth, nineteen hundred 
and eight (Thirty-fifth Statutes at Large, page fifty-one), is hereby 
amended to read: "That the lumber, lath, shingles, crating, ties, 
piles, poles, posts, bolts, logs, bark, pulp wood, and -other marketable 



[Pub. 80.| 39 

materials obtained from the forests on the Menominee Reservation 
shall be sold under such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the 
Interior may prescribe. The net proceeds of the sale of all forest 
products shall be deposited in the Treasury of the United States to 
the credit of the Menominee Tribe of Indians. Such proceeds shall 
bear interest at the rate of four per centum per annmn, and the inter- 
est shall be used for the benefit of such Indians in such manner as 
the Secretary of the Interior shall prescribe." 

That without bias or prejudice to the rights or interests of any- 
party to the litigation now pending, the Secretary of the Interior be, 
and he hereby is, authorized to seU the timber on the so-called ''school 
lands" and "swamp lands" within the boundaries of the Bad liiver 
and La*c du Flambeau Indian Reservations in Wisconsin, and to which 
the State of Wisconsin has asserted a claim; to keep a separate 
account of the proceeds of such sale with each legal subdivision of 
such land and to deposit the said proceeds at interest in a national 
bank, bonded for the safe-keeping of individual Indian moneys, to be 
paid over, together with the interest thereon, to the party or parties 
who shall finally be adjudged to be entitled to such fund: Provided, 
That the consent of the State or parties claiming title therefrom be 
obtained before any such sale shall be made. 

With the consent of the Indians of the Lac Court Oreilles Tribe, 
to be obtained in such manner as the Secretary of the Interior may 
require, flowage rights on the unallotted tribal lands, and, with the 
consent of the allottee or of the heirs of any deceased allottee and 
imder such rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior 
may prescribe, flowage rights on any allotted lands in the Lac Court 
OreiUes Reservation, in the State of Wisconsin, may be leased or 
granted for storage-reservoir purposes. Tlie tribe, as a condition to 
giving its consent to the granting or leasing of flowage rights on tribal 
lands, and any allottee or the heii-s of any deceased allottee, as a con- 
dition to giving his or their consent to the leasing or granting of flow- 
age rights on their respective allotments, may determine, subject to the 
ai)proval of the Secretary of the Interior, what consideration or rental 
shall be received for sucn flowage rights, and in what manner and for 
what purposes such consideration or rental shall be paid or expended; 
and the consideration or rental shall be paid or expended uncier such 
rules and regulations as the Secretary of the Interior may prescribe. 

For the completion of the road on the Red Cliff Reservation, 
$6,500, to be reimbursed out of the funds of the Indians of said 
reservation, mider such rules, regulations, and conditions as the 
Secretary of the Interior nuiy prescribe. 

WYOMING. 

Sec. 26. For support and civilization of Shoshone Indians in 
Wyoming, including pay of employees, SI 5,000. 

For support and education of one hundred and seventy-five Indian 
pupils at the Indian school, Shoshone Reservation, Wyoming, 
nu'luding pay of superintendent, $31,025; for general repairs and 
improvements, $5,000; in aU, $36,025. 

For support of Shoshones in Wyoming: For pay of ])hysician, 
teacher, carpenter, miller, engineei-, farmer, and blacksmith (article 
ten, treaty of July third, eighteen hmuh-cMl and sixty-eight), $5,000; 



40 [Pot. 80.J 

for pay of second blacksmith, and such iron and steel and other 
materials as may be required, as per article eight, same treaty, 
$1,000; in all, $6,000. 

For repairs at the old abandoned military post of Fort Washakie, 
on the Wmd River Reservation, Wyoming, $1,721. 

For continuing the work of constructing an irrigation system within 
the diminished Shoshone or Wmd River Reservation, in Wyoming, 
including ths maintenance and operation of completed canals, 
$50,000, reimbursable in accordance with the provisions of the Act 
March third, nineteen hundred and five, and to remain available 
until expended. 

To enable the Secretary of the Interior to have prepared and 
submitted to Congi'ess at the beginning of the next regular session 
plans and estimates of the character and cost of structures necessary 
lor completing the irrigation of all of the irrigable lands of the Sho- 
shone or Wind River Reservation, including the ceded lands of said 
reservation, in Wyoming, $5,000. 

For continuing the work of constructing roads and bridges within 
the diminished Shoshone or Wind River Reservation, in Wyoming, 
$25,000, said sum to be reimbursed from any funds which are now 
or may hereafter be placed in the Treasury to the credit of said In- 
dians. 

For payment of salary and expenses of Joseph H. Norris as super- 
visor of Indian schools, October twenty-first to November eleventh, 
inclusive, nineteen hundred and twelve, $257. 

Sec. 27. On the first Monday in December, nineteen hundred and 
seventeen, and annually thereafter, the Secretary of the Treasury 
shall transmit to the Speaker of tlie House of Representatives esti- 
mates of the amounts of the receipts to, and expenditures which the 
Secretary of the Interior recommends to be made for the benefit of 
the Indians from, aU tribal funds of Indians for the ensuing fiscal 
year; and such statement shaU show (firet) the total amounts esti- 
mated to be received from any and all sources whatsoever, which 
will be placed to the credit of each tribe of Indians, in trust or other- 
wise, at the close of the ensuing fiscal year, (second) an analysis show- 
ing the amounts which the Federal Government is directed and re- 
quired by treaty stipulations and agreements to expend from each 
of said funds or from the Federal Treasury, giving references to the 
existing treaty or agreement or statute, (third) the amounts wliich 
the Secretary of the Interior recommends to be spent from each 
of the tribal funds held in trust or otherwise, and the purpose for which 
said amounts are to be expended, and said statement shall show the 
amounts which he recommends to be disbursed (a) for per capita 
payments in money to the Indians, (b) for salaries or compensation 
of officers and employees, (c) for compensation of counsel and attor- 
ney fees, and (d) for support and civdization: Protnded, That there- 
after no money shall be expended from Indian tribal funds without 
Bpeeific appropriation by CfonCTCss except as follows: Equalization 
of allotments, education of Indian children in accordance with exist- 
ing law, per capita and other payments, all of which are herebv 
continued in full force and eft'ect: Provided further, That this shall 
not change existing law with reference to the Five Civilized Tribes. 

Sec. 28. On or before the thirty-first day of December, nineteen 
hundred and sixteen, the Bureau of Efficiency shall prepare and 



PUB. 80.1 41 

submit to the vSecrctary of the Interior a system of hookkecpino; and 
accounting for the Bureau of Indian Affairs that will enable the said 
Secretary, on or before July first, nineteen hundred and seventeen, 
to meet the requirements of section twenty-six of the Indian Appro- 
priation Act approved June thirtieth, nineteen hundred and thirteen 
(Thirty-eighth Statutes at Large, page one hmidred and three). 
Approved, May 18, 1916. 



^^ 



A^ 



1. 



l.!Mr'33 






^. ^' 



'^^^/ V 






^. 



•V . , i> 



^ .^V^'^ ^ .. ^^"^ 



.f 



0" 






■-;/-^'- 






> 









^. 



c 









K^ 



,^0. 






^C- 



o 



J^ c ° " " * '^^ 






.'^<?. 






> 






.^ 



^ ^--^u^-'^^* ^^ 



^^ 









■'0 K 



.-?>' 







' n 


c, 


^ 














c,^ 


^-. 










^- %;;*i3^-<^* - 


?-^'- 























,*^ 


-ir" 


■-» , 


,. 




--y 






'^> 








/• 








4^ 


^^:. 
U 


* 




- I:r 












•■> 


c ° " 




' • 


• ^ 


.0^ 




^>* 


^-^' 

















V 














^^^ 


'''^,. 
















v.- 



"^^\''' 









7\\ 


^^M 


0^ 


c°" 


*^^,/7^^ ' 


,,4 


?<, 







^. 



.0' 



'"-^ o"* 



.^ 



40. 



:ki 



.^" 






-'i'^;, 



'^^ ,^^ 

•<"<;^ 

^-i^. 



,v. 












"•*"^ 








"''.'' 




.^' 




' 








0^ 








c ° " » * 




0^ 


(} 




°<. 


r 


.0^ 

.0^ 






■ ^ 


"^^ 


^. 


.& 




'V, 


.A"^ 


-': 


?^--^-> 


% 


.^' 









%. 




A 


J 


^>t-, 






o 


V 


-,/ 


^^ 





■-^^0^ 



DOBBS BROS. 

LISRARV CINDINO 



ST. AUGUSTINE 



O,^ O. * J, « • 






